Wikileaks releases unredacted USA State Dept files....
 

Better hope your names not on them

"WHISTLEBLOWING WEB SITE Wikileaks has suffered a major setback with a leak of fully unredacted US State Department cables including sources' details surfacing online, thanks to a blunder by its founder, Julian Assange. The leak occurred sometime after Assange shared the password of an encrypted 'insurance' file stored online with a contact believed to have been trustworthy. This individual then used the password to decrypt the collection of 250,000 US diplomatic cables, which include details that could identify US State Department sources, according to the German newspaper Der Spiegel."

Wikileaks suffers a major leak- The Inquirer

what a ****ing idiot

Generally Assange has tried to avoid releasing information that would seriously endanger national-security; releasing information that would expose misconduct and so forth without doing so.

Regardless, it's surprising how much flak he's gotten hit with. Obviously it's not about him releasing dangerous information, it's about him releasing information that makes the US and other countries look bad. Government's don't like it when their misconduct is being exposed. They already tried to frame him for sexual misconduct, recently he's suffered a major hacking-attack, evidently from the US (his website is now operating out of a Swiss server), and there has been threats made against his life.

My guess is that there are two possibilities

• With all the flak Mr. Assange has been taking just for releasing non-damaging information he's figured "**** Mr. Nice-Guy -- I'm just going to release everything -- let them deal with what may come of it." Assuming this scenario is correct, I hope none of the information released isn't too damaging (and for all we know, considering the "danger" from the earlier WikiLeaks releases were hyped as to make them appear far worse than they actually were, this may actually be the case).
• The US government hacked into the insurance file, then released it to justify bringing the hammer down on Mr. Assange. After all, if you can't justify cracking down on somebody for a criminal offense; frame them for something which you can. Yes, I know this makes me sound cynical beyond recovery, but it wouldn't be the first time a government's framed somebody it didn't like, and considering the desire of various governments to stamp WikiLeaks out, it wouldn't be terribly surprising to me.

Regardless, I could imagine this will probably justify the destruction of WikiLeaks, possibly the assassination of Julian Assange, maybe even various forms of internet censorship. Needless to say, this easily could be used to justify a host of "cyber security" proposals which are 90-95% dedicated to massive autonomous surveillance and datamining and 5-10% dedicated to actually protecting national infrastructure.


Robyn C.
"Never let a crisis go to waste, and should one fail to present itself: Create one"

Jane Doh
"They already tried to frame him for sexual misconduct, recently he's suffered a major hacking-attack, evidently from the US (his website is now operating out of a Swiss server), and there has been threats made against his life."

Did you Italicize the words "(his website is now operating out of a Swiss server)" ?

Does it matter where his server is ? If it's connected to the Internet, it's available for hacking, regardless of location.
And if he happened to vacate the planet for whatever reason, I don't think it would be a great loss.
.

500N,

I was simply italicizing text in parantheses. All I was saying was that they knocked his server off line, and he relocated to a Swiss site.

I can't help thinking that this issue is one where those who have served and those who haven't make their respective backgrounds obvious.

I cannot conceive of a soldier/sailor/airman who would deliberately disclose classified information. It is drummed in from day 1 week 1, that such action is such a massive no-no that you may as well consider your life to be over. In the UK, it is certainly an offence against the Official Secrets Act, if not Treason. Both carry stiff penalties, especially for serving staff.

It really doesn't matter what the content is, embarrassing, private, not that big a deal, presidency-threatening, whatever. It's not something that your average Joe judges. If the bit of paper has "SECRET" stamped top & bottom, back and front, it is just that. Utterly irrelevant what's on the piece of paper.

I don't know what other Governments do, but the UK govt will go to EXTRAORDINARY lengths to recover certain classified information should it be found to be somewhere other than where it should be.

Assange needs to be give 30 years to think about this.

Jane-DoH
Doesn't matter where he is located, if they REALLY wanted to knock it off line again they can and would.

Even though it is supposed to be separate from the US Gov't, the US does control the IP addresses for a start and that's before doing anything more underhand.

.

Seriously.......were do you think most of the files came from??????
IIRC it was a US Int Corp guy who handed over most stuff.

Train.....Cab.......Bar......Politicians hands.....

500N:

Sorry but that's not entirely true. There's many who can put up servers that the US can't bring down. They could try blocking them but imagine the furore when, (not if), they get caught censoring the internet... :ouch:

Said PFC is in a world of hurt. He's looking at a looong stretch in Leavenworth.

And as for your other point, read what I said again. I said "certain" information. I'm not going to go into what that might be, but it certainly doesn't get into politicians' hands, nor does it go anywhere near pubs, bars trains, taxis or anything else other than where it's supposed to be.

R280

Sorry there was an element of sarcasm with the second comment, so have no reason to read it again.

Quite familiar with looking after classified info thanks

I recall a Foreign senior officer opposite me leaving a British Secret file on the train table whilst he went to the buffet car. He had no idea I was a Serviceman.
I reported it, naturally, but don't let's kid ourselves that this kind of thing doesn't happen, and quite often. I used to know a WO snowdrop whose team was kept quite busy. Actually, being paid to hang around in bars and strip clubs wasn't that bad a lifestyle - beats traffic duty!

p.s. the aforementioned docs can be found in about 30 seconds. Pandora's box is open.

AA

Splitting hairs but the result is the same, whether you call it blocking or whatever.

Denial of service has already been done, however Wikileaks seems to have got a bit smarter now.

500N:

As has atdhe... :ok:

Correct me if I am wrong Jane but I thought Assange had yet to face court on any sexual charges and was appealing against extradition to Sweden, where he would be further questioned, with just the possibility of charges being laid?

When all the sexual charges have been dealt with Assange still has to face up to the reality that he has been handling stolen property.

:( This is all my fault you know, I jinxed things. Just the other day I was thinking how good it was to not have heard about the creep for a while.

rh200:

Please... Have a strong word with yourself... That was uncalled for!!!! ;)

What is all the fuss about? It is an old researchers' adage that that there are no secrets only lazy researchers.
The problem here is that the original source is an allegation in a press article and all that implies. It is not fact only a journalists view which may reflect his source and their agenda.
Some time ago I placed on this site a thread that gave the sequence, including code words, for the manning of Corsham in the 'Bolt from the blue scenario' which was deleted. This removal was on the grounds that the code words may be of use to someone. All of the information came from TNA files and was 50 years old.
So perhaps this is the wrong forum to expect balanced and informed judgement.

Can someone please explain to me how Post 18 by Donalduck can be deemed to be a reasonable reply to post 15 by rh200?

Best I take one of my pills.

Donald is clearly quackers...:}

I'll do better and give myself a good spanking, or if I can find someone else they can do it for me:E

Post 18 Donald?:confused: did I miss a feisty repy, dam I need to check more often:sad:

You're right... Having reread my post it was a bit uncalled for... and totally quackers! I had a bit of a heart scare this week (Pericarditus) and I could swear its messing with my head.... short tempered... flying off the handle... Is this normal?

P.S. Don't worry I am not a professional pilot but rather Ground Crew so it hasn't affected my job to the extent it could have... I am just a dude who fly's dem crazy ultralight type thingys so I am double quackers...

Sorry to all... I will now shut up and try to keep the chest pain away.:(

Roadster280

What about Bradley Manning? Not that I approve of what he did, but the fact is he was a soldier and did deliberately leak classified information.

Yes, but

1.) Julian Assange is a civilian, not a government official or military personnel.
2.) It's not clear if the information he released will cause significant damage (and we've heard all sorts of hype about the danger of the information he's currently released).
3.) It's possible the government decrypted his insurance file and released it to frame WikiLeaks for it as to justify shutting the site down. After all, if you can't find a crisis to exploit, just make your own.


ColinB

Correct.

Jane-DoH

"Lord Haw Haw" (William Joyce) was a civilian - didn't save him from the Gallows though.

Posting from France you may recall the Dreyfus case where if someone had have had the fortitude to blow the the whistle a terrible injustice would have been avoided.

ColinB

The Dreyfus case was in Nov 1894 just 24 years since the War with the Prussians and only 20 years before a Re-united Germany invaded once again - and only 46 years before they invaded yet again in 1940.

People have complained in the past on these forums that French maps are appalling; they have however totally failed to consider the prime purpose of such maps - which is really quite simple.

The prime purpose of French Maps is to confuse the hell out of the German Army the next time they invade!!!

Q. Why are French roads tree lined?

A. So the German Army can march in the shade.



I know, chapeau et pardessus............

Bradley Manning in my view has surpassed all previous similar crimes. Yes, he is a soldier, and therefore has deliberately chosen to do what he did. It's not a case of "he should have known better". He DID know he was committing treasonable crimes, and therefore did so in the full knowledge that not only has he endangered his country, but also potentially the whole world.

If just one of those 250,000 cables indicated US thinking on a particularly sensitive issue (eg "We're OK with the idea of South Korea invading the North" or "If Argentina reinvades the Falklands, we should not interfere on either side", then this alters the world, and affected governments may make choices they might otherwise have shied away from.

Additionally, Manning's disclosure of the plaintext of 250,000 signals that would have been transmitted over secure means has compromised those secure means.

He has caused inestimable damage, caused the DoD/State to incur huge cost, and is an utter disgrace to his uniform, and his country.

The weasel seems to find the spine to do the wrong thing, but not the right thing. For instance, he found the guts to punch a female officer in the face, but had difficulty with being kept in the brig in Quantico.

The man disgusts me. If he cannot be tried for treason, and face the death penalty, then he should be separately charged with disclosure of each of the 250,000 signals. Sentences to run consecutively. It doesn't really matter if it takes 6 months to read out the charges in court, or gets just a day in jail for each of his 250,000 crimes.

He hasn't just crossed the line, he's 15 miles over it, and stuck two fingers up all the way. Time for justice to be done.

Assange is another worthless turd. So Manning stole the info, and Assange decides to publish it for his own self-aggrandisement purposes. If Manning had simply given the info the Russians, he would have been a straightforward traitor, and probably dealt with accordingly. But no, Assange lets the whole world see it. So it's not just one country with the info, it's every Tom, Dick and Harry.

Secrets are secret for a reason. Someone I know tried it on with with my buddy's wife, and it wasn't exactly a hostile approach. My buddy disturbed them in the early stages before it got out of hand. I know he (the cad) did this, but he doesn't know I know. My buddy wants me to imagine it hadn't happened, for he is hoping time will heal his marriage, and it never needs to be mentioned again. I wish he'd never told me of the original deed. I can't look the cad in the eye and consider him my friend anymore. He's just a slimy turd, and always will be. Every time I see the woman, I think "whore".

Between the pair of them, Manning and Assange are despicable ****s.

I trust this clears up any confusion.

500N
No, it matters not where his server is but what IS important is that people who hold opinions like yourself are in the minority. The disappearance of some really evil people from this planet is not to be lamented, however I don't think Assange falls into this category.
Please don't confuse the embarrassment of governments/politicians with the release of documents which do not compromise the security of our frontline troops.

I'm sure your "buddy" loves the idea of you classifying his wife as a whore. Comparing this with a national security issue speaks volumes for your mindset. Try respecting your "buddy's wishes.





Roadster
As above. Land of the free.....where would that be. All that this guy has done is make the USA's "allies" aware of what a bunch of lying treacherous Ar$$eholes they are.

And had a UK soldier done the same, that's all he would be doing. It doesn't make it right though. Manning knew better. Assange is primping his prima donna feathers.

As for my analogy, that's all it was. Of course a minor domestic situation isn't to be compared with a National Security issue. Nothing to do with mindsets. I was merely pointing out that once you become aware of something, it changes your perception; whether that be on a personal or governmental basis.

I totally agree with all you say about the despicable pair but as we are now friends would you consider sending me her telephone number as I will shortly be making a stop over in Atlanta?

I for one, would be happy for a serving UK armed forces person to expose some of their political bosses for the liars they are. Some senior retired officers have made comments but serving 2*,3* and 4* are reluctant to risk their pensions and what remains of their careers and of course the possibility of a title or political career on retirement.

This is why so many of our frontline servicemen and women continue to lack adequate equipment for combat duties. Whistleblowing under these circumstances is not treason, it's a patriotic duty.

I'll have to disagree. Anything protectively marked is to be protected. It's that simple. I'll leave it there.

Shack

"Please don't confuse the embarrassment of governments/politicians with the release of documents which do not compromise the security of our frontline troops."

I don't confuse the issues. He may not have named names but just like intelligence Services, the enemy will be able to put 2 and 2 together and work out what is what and who is who. It also gives more info to the enemy on the Intelligence picture and how it occurs - all potential ammunition for them to use in the future to make it harder to get this info which in turn means it may
"compromise the security of our front line troops'. Anyone is capable of seeing a pattern and using it to their own advantage.

And now the latest release of documents with names still in the cables,
well, ................... Supposedly, the password was included in a book about Wikileaks but the password was useless without the file containing the cables. And then someone found the file. So the password by itself was useless but someone put 2 and 2 together.

I'll agree with Roadster. "Between the pair of them, Manning and Assange are despicable ****s."
.

Manning should not have done it, Assange is no different to any other journo out there, all of whom would sell their Grandmothers for a scoop/exclusive. Sadly Manning is a discredit to his uniform but at the end of the day all Assange did was publish the truth. What's the problem? LIve with it get on with it and in the future maybe politicians should not be such scheming lying bar stewards.

is there a sub judice or reporting restriction law in the USA? Manning has not been to trial yet and so has not been found guilty. As this forum is owned by an American company some of the comments above, while possibly justified, could be opening a can of legal worms
1) comments prejudicial to a fair trial 2) possible libel if he's found not guilty, or not actually tried?

The irony of it...

""A Guardian journalist has, in a previously undetected act of gross negligence or malice, and in violation of a signed security agreement with the Guardian's editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger, disclosed top secret decryption passwords to the entire, unredacted, Wikileaks Cablegate archive," Wikileaks said."

Wikileaks accuses the guardian of leaking unredacted cables- The Inquirer

The US didn't give the death sentence to Robert Hanssen, Aldrich Ames, Jonathan Pollard, or the Walkers - and their crimes were far more serious.

If this information is so critical why was a Private allowed access to such a broad range of secret information. I imagine some higher ups are happy to let Julian Assange or anyone else take the heat for what can only be a serious lack of common sense security on their part.

cazatou

True, but he was actually promoting foreign propaganda. This guy didn't seem to be promoting any nation's agenda.

Also, as I understand it the UK doesn't have a death penalty anymore (we do in the United States, however).


ColinB

Agreed


Roadster280

That's not 100% certain. For all we know the US government might have done it. After all, the intelligence agencies has more than adequate capabilities to decrypt the files, then release them. Sure it would leave some sources out to dry, but it would justify bringing the hammer down on WikiLeaks and Julian Assange for good. It could even be used to justify various forms of internet censorship.

Seems so simple, except sometimes the government misuses the classification system not to protect the nation from enemy attack, but to insulate itself from scrutiny.

In the case where the classification was only to protect the nation, you would have a much better argument

All WikiLeaks' secret US cables are on BitTorrent in full ? The Register "Wikileaks has accused a Guardian journalist of negligently publishing the passphrase for a database of unredacted secret US diplomatic cables in a book. The encrypted database is available on BitTorrent. The book by David Leigh, Inside Julian Assange's War on Secrecy, contains an excerpt explaining how he persuaded Julian Assange™ to give him the PGP passphrase, named as ACollectionOfDiplomaticHistory_Since_1966_ToThe_PresentDay#. "