Wiki Leaks Founder Set up?
It seems the Wiki Leaks founder Julian Assange is being accused of rape and molestation and the Swedish police have a warrant for his arrest.
"The warrant was issued late on Friday", said Karin Rosander, communications head at Sweden's prosecutors' office. Now what would a communications head be doing involved in a rape case? Surely this is not his area? Unless of course it is the communication head's responsibility to liaise with the media. :-?
This stinks of a fit up to me. And to be honest when I heard the news on the radio it came as no surprise. I thought he'd either be set up for something or assassinated eventually.
It he has been fitted up its a sad day for democracy.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11047025
Then there is this commentary about the BBC report on another website.
"The warrant was issued late on Friday", said Karin Rosander, communications head at Sweden's prosecutors' office. Now what would a communications head be doing involved in a rape case? Surely this is not his area? Unless of course it is the communication head's responsibility to liaise with the media. :-?
This stinks of a fit up to me. And to be honest when I heard the news on the radio it came as no surprise. I thought he'd either be set up for something or assassinated eventually.
It he has been fitted up its a sad day for democracy.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11047025
Then there is this commentary about the BBC report on another website.
Read through the article and ask yourself what you don’t see. Have you spotted the omission? Okay, here it is: where is any information about the alleged victim? We see only that an accusation has been made, but there is none whatsoever about the person Assange is accused of raping.
It is telling that no victim has been mentioned in this story. You’d think, if there was any weight to the accusation, that we’d know something about the victim. Is this person female or male? Is the person a minor, or an adult? Is the alleged victim from Sweden, or some other country?
In most news articles pertaining to rape, we know at least some minimum amount of information about the alleged victim, even if only the person’s age and sex. But none has been provided here. Why not? This accusation, directed against someone whose only "crime" so far happens to be publicly embarrassing the powerful by disclosing information the powerful want suppressed, should be looked at with all the suspicion it deserves.
Regardless of whether the rape charge is true or not, one thing is almost certain: Wikileaks is now dead. Assange pissed off all the wrong people, and he either didn’t realize that efforts to assassinate him would likely be less physical and more political, or was insufficiently prepared. Whatever the case, if this charge gains traction in the corporate media — and I can’t imagine why it wouldn’t — then one more truth-teller has fallen.
Post edited by Scottie_uk on
Calling all ASCII Art Architects Visit the WOS Wall of Text and contribute: https://www.yourworldoftext.com/wos
Comments
Good, WFT was that all about then, a wee bit of corruption? And was it the fact that it would be obvious to almost everyone that it was fishy and therefore the charges were quickly dropped and swept under the carpet to save embarrassment.
I could not find the new article easily because the old one had no link to the new. Also the article does not show up on the news front page, or the world front page. You have to go to world news and then Europe.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11049316
Well he changed his mind quickly. So we hear no sniff of victim and no reason for quashing the case. Odd:-?
Odds on he'll be assassinated before the years out. :sad:
This sort of thing just goes to show how any of us can get fitted up, he will no longer be thought of as that Wikki bloke, people will first think of the rape charge wikki bloke. They have deliberatly done this to him, they have probably reached their quota for assisted suicides this month, so they had to try something else.
Hmmm, interesting: Wikileaks clambers aboard Pirate Party network (The Register)
I think Wikileaks is a good thing, but Mr Assange is obviously a bit of an arsehole:
Wikileaks falls out with human rights groups (The Register)
I wouldn't give weight to *anything* posted by a BBC 'Have Your Say' commentard - they are just Daily Mail readers with an O-level. ;)
Nothing. Even if he gets himself 'suicided' Wikileaks will keep functioning.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/21/pentagon-lawyers-consider-criminal-charges-wikileaks/
I think he has just ordered himself a pair of concrete boots !
No it was not a comment on site site, but a commentary about the article on another website. I have amended the original post for clarity.
Isurance file? Please explain.
The Pentagon started to make some very threatening noises towards Wikileaks but not, strangely, towards the other news outlets (I think The Times newspaper was one of them).
Both Wikileaks and these other news organisations still have a large (15,000) number of unpublished documents which are thought to be more incriminating towards (mostly) America. These will be released before the end of the year.
So, for protection, Wikileaks published on there site a very heavily encrypted file called "insurance.asc" which is 1.4gig. It's encrypted in a way that even the various security services round the world will have big problems decrypting it, i.e. they can't. Needless to say this file has been downloaded by a lot of people.
Nobody knows what's in the file, it could be anything at all from total rubbish to some very serious government toppling material, nobody except Wikileaks knows.
If the (probably) Americans try and get really nasty with Wikileaks then all they have to do is publish the pass phrase and all of this material instantly becomes public knowledge.
As has been said previously, it could be nothing but a bluff, the missing 15,000 pages, or as someone said recently, the proof that the armies have taken out huge insurance policies on the soldiers and when one of them is killed, the army get the big payout, not the family !
Either way, the very fact that hundreds of thousands of people have downloaded and saved the file, once the password is released, not even the govenment can keep a lid on it, or it could be the recipe for Lamb Hotpot, the fun is that only a select few actually know !
As long as they have no way of tracing the download destinations, otherwise there will be a lot more people vanishing without trace.
What's to stop it being cracked by someone early. If its only a pass phrase then all someone needs to do is run a bruit force cracking method on it 24-7 and maybe after a few months the pass key will be discovered.
It could be encrypted, encrypted once more and then encrypted again a few times, all with different keys and encryption algoritms. I might be naive but i do think there are encryptions that can't be cracked.
Yeah this could be very true.
Its the infinite monkey problem.
Say, for example, that the pass phrase is the complete text of Richard the Third as produced (and downloaded by millions of people) by the Gutenberg Project.
How long would a brute force attack take then?
(With modern supercomputer power your talking thousands of years at least)
Well if its that big then sure. However, as I have said above it probably is very secure.
LINK:
http://file.wikileaks.org/file/us-cia-redcell-exporter-of-terrorism-2010.pdf
the only form of encryption that is truly unbreakable is a one time pad, any encryption based on an algorithm can be broken with sufficient time and resources.
I read an article by a leading cryptographer (who was basically showing as snake-oil someone's claim to have a usefully stronger algorithm with a 40kbit key). The important point here, talking about AES-256, is that it would take a Dyson sphere surrounding the sun, capturing all its energy, to power a computer to merely put a 187 bit counter through all its states without even doing the computations required in each state to do some brute forcing. (This isn't for today's technology, it's the theoretical most efficient computer that can be possibly constructed). Then, what processing we could do with the energy of a supernova (I include it because I liked the phrase "orgy of computation"), we'll ignore the horrible unit 'ergs' (he should have used joules, dammit):
To sum up:
(The full article is here: https://www.infosecisland.com/security-videos-view/1224-The-Doghouse-Crypteto.html )
Of course you can try brute forcing the passphrase on something like aes-256 but it's a slow process to do this if the passphrase has been chosen with even just a modicum of care and is sufficiently long. I suspect the Wikileaks people are sufficiently paranoid that they have chosen a very, very good passphrase that is not likely to be brute forced any time soon.