WikiLeaks founder uploads mystery (1.4GB "Insurance") file

[Turborama]

Source: New Europe

After leaking 92,000 classified US military documents, Julian Assange, the founder of the whistle blowing website, has uploaded a file called “insurance” to the website and elsewhere. The file is 1.4 gigabytes, a thousand times larger than the recently leaked documents.

The file is encrypted under AES256, which is equal to the methods used by the US to encrypt Top Secret material. It is estimated that even the fastest computer would take millions of years to decrypt the file.

It is believed that Assange, who is under intense scrutiny by the US, may have distributed the pass key to supporters, who could release it to the public. However, the talented former hacker would realise that this could place supporters in a difficult position.

=snip=

The contents of the file are unknown. However, the recent release of documents, detailing the coalition’s experiences in Afghanistan, are not part of the 500,000 documents from Iraq, alleged to have been sent to WikLeaks by Bradley Manning, who is currently held in the US. Manning is also accused of passing a video of an incident in Garani in Afghanistan that local authorities say killed 100 civilians, most of them children were killed during a helicopter assault, as well as 260,000 U.S. State Department cables.

Read more: http://www.neurope.eu/articles/WikiLeaks-founder-uploads-mystery-file/102093.php

[ixion]

1. And no one is concerned about the crimes in the leaks, apparently, just that they were leaked

which is disgusting.

[SILVER__FOX52]

7. There are two types of "leakers"........

those that leak for pay and those that leak to expose, stupidity or corruption. The first is vile the second is heroic. Some people must learn the difference. The Army Brass, recently came out to claim that Wiki has blood on their hands, due to the release of the documents. What fucking hypocrites. These army statements would be laughable, if the military's murder and torture of civilian were not so common. The MIC are a bunch of vile human beings and we were warned about this, by President Eisenhower.

[Raster]

14. Yes, and here at DU we have our own "Wiki has blood on their hands" contingent,

purposely overlooking the carnage the US is inflicting in the Middle East. It is fucking disgusting.

[Recursion]

97. Umm... it's easy for both to be true

Two statements:

1. The US is guilty of creating carnage in the middle east
2. Releasing the leaked documents will lead to more deaths in Afghanistan

How does asserting #2 deny #1?

[FedUp_Queer]

106. Umm...no it's not.

First, I don't think it's easy for both to be true, particularly in this case. The documents show activities from January of 2004 to December of 2009. In that case, how could revealing what already happened endanger the future, particularly because these documents are essentially after action reports and documents of events that happened in the past...as much as 6 years ago, particularly when, as Assange said in an interview with the Australian Broadcasting Company (yes, ABC), he gave the White House the opportunity to look at the documents to see if the documents contained the names of any informants, or anyone else the documents' release could harm. Here is the question it boils down to: Who has the power to stop the carnage, the entity cause it or someone revealing what happened in the past?

[Recursion]

135. Seriously?

In that case, how could revealing what already happened endanger the future, particularly because these documents are essentially after action reports and documents of events that happened in the past

Because if people find out that a specific person was helping NATO, the Taliban will put a price on his head.

[FedUp_Queer]

239. Didn't happen.

Here's the kicker, as I already stated, it didn't happen. The White House, at least, didn't seem to think so...or care.

[bigmonkey]

107. It doesn't, but it ignores the disproportionate carnage caused.

Jaywalking and murder are both crimes, but morally a jaywalker and a murderer are not usefully thought of as "the same" because both are criminals. To assert that they were would be close to quibbling.

[krawhitham]

119. +1

[stevenleser]

132. Yes, I am undecided on this whole thing. Once again, it disappoints that some are so quick to jump

to one side or the other and ignore the subtleties here.

If I had to choose a side, I would side on behalf of the whistleblowers. I think it is important for the truth to come out and I am tired of those who expose wrongdoing being set upon. But we also have to face facts that in some cases, this being one of them, it may be true that the action will hurt our troops in the short term. It casts the whole Af-Pak expedition in a harsh light and may fuel recruitment and revenge killings in the region for our troops opponents.

Very simply, there needs to be an investigation. There also needs to be an examination of how we wage a war of this kind. Assuming the general facts are true that the Taliban harbored the organization that attacked us on 9/11 and gave us a hard time about turning them over, then the war IMHO was justified. OK, how do we proceed in a war like that given the conditions in Afghanistan. Do these kinds of wars necessarily lead to some of the horrible things suggested in the documents and videos? Probably.

Militaries are still trained with the idea that you have a wide front and you are facing another organized army. When you take the major objectives you win. That isnt the case with wars so much anymore. The kind of war like we had in Afghanistan and Iraq after the first few months probably makes combatants hate the ethnic/religious group in the occupied country. What that ought to lead people to do is try everything they can to prevent wars like this in the first place and end them as quickly as possible if they cannot be avoided.

[Grinchie]

142. There is nothing subtle about the enormous numbers of suicides in the military these days

In fact, it's tantamount to a canary dropping dead in the coal mine just before the whole place goes up in flames.

Yet OMG, the secretive inner workings of the inept Government may never be revealed, especially when it shows how clueless they are when it comes to strategy , tactics, and cost of ownership.

Wouldn't it be nice if the motives and action were actually based on a coalition of countries that aggreed on the actions imposed, instead of a unilateral projection of force that proved to be nothing more that a politically motivated resource grab to keep the Ponzi sheme from collapsing?

At this point, the whole world except for the people that extract income from the continued wars, knows that there is something fishy in the whole "Democracy" building, and see it more as "Corporatocracy" building. You would think that all the increased "Productivity" that has been ballyhooed by industry for the last 20 years would have yield machines that can produce the highest tech weaponry imaginable with nominal cost, simply because it's robotic, demands precision and repeatability, and requires nothing more than a few trained monkey's to feed parts into the individual hoppers.

This is probably that case, but the true costs in lives and treatment of the injured is never put into the equation, and when the truth comes out, such as when the VA Hospital was exposed for it horrendous facilities, the politicians run for cover.

We have troops working the battlefield that are on antidepressants in order to cope with their 5th tour of duty, and there is no end in sight.

God forbid the day when the Troops stop committing suicide, and start planning revenge on this corrupted system that exploited them in the prime of their youth to work for Corporate interests instead of the noble cause they were told.

[stevenleser]

234. There actually was a coalition of countries in Afghanistan who agreed

The main members of the coalition were:

United States – 78,430
United Kingdom – 9,500
Germany – 4,400
France – 3,750
Italy – 3,300
Canada – 2,830
Poland – 2,500
Turkey – 1,710
Australia – 1,550
Spain – 1,470
Romania – 1,140

Another 34 countries provided troops or other support. That is a serious coalition.

Lets all not forget that the Taliban were an almost universally hated group and government whose many atrocities were well documented. There were many folks who were against the Iraq war and for the Afghanistan war from the beginning.

IMHO we should have left well enough alone when the Soviets invaded. Joe Wilson's interesting use of the congress and CIA aside, if we had let the Soviets finish the job and install whatever government they wanted to install, we would not be where we are.

[FedUp_Queer]

240. Universally hated?

Who exactly universally hated them? Our government gave them support up through mid 2001. They were in Texas in 1997 for talks on a gas pipeline. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/west_asia/37021.stm Let's not forget the Taliban's offer to turn bin Laden over in October of 2001. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5 Note also the section about public opinion regarding the Taliban (this is 2008, but it's telling) http://www.cfr.org/publication/10551/taliban_in_afghanistan.html#p5 The point is that "there's a coalition" or they were "almost universally hated" is neither true nor relevant. The fact is that we had diplomatic relations with them for years, we trained bin Laden (hell, he was part of the mujahideen whom we trained to defeat the Soviets). If this "war" was really about getting bin Laden, we would have gotten him at Tora Bora. As it is, it's not. This nothing more than the Military Industrial Complex controlling foreign policy. Remember: follow the money.

[stevenleser]

246. Yep, and they were still universally hated. You can try and parse that all you want n/t

[FedUp_Queer]

248. First...that's not true. (Just because you say it, doesn't make it true to satisfy your bloodlust.)

And who cares if they were anyway? There are a lot of "universally hated" governments...the one of George W. Bush comes to mind. So what? That's a reason to bomb the civilians of the country? I guess, by that logic, it would have been okay with you had a coalition of governments bombed Washington to remove Bush. I mean, after all, bin Laden killed 3,000 on 9/11. We killed, what, 100,000, 200,000, 500,000, 1,000,000 in Iraq? How many thousands in Afghanistan? Which government is worse? I don't see your admission of our complicity in the rise of bin Laden (he was, after all, our boy when we trained him and armed him to fight the Soviets). I'm sorry you have such a bloodlust to kill thousands of civilians.

[stevenleser]

250. In your fantasy world, the Taliban were a beloved group worldwide then, eh? Good luck with that meme

[FedUp_Queer]

251. You can't possibly be serious.

I never said they were beloved; in fact, as I already said, it doesn't f-ing matter. Why don't you just own your bloodlust...revel in your apparent love of death and destruction, as long as it happens to "those people." You have an indefensible position, unless you believe that the lives of some people are worth less than others. Rather than indiscriminately bombing CIVILIANS, if this were really about "getting those baaaad Taliban," we could have sent special forces in to get them. The issues, that you seem not to understand are as follows:

1) The Taliban did NOT attack us, al Qaeda did...15 of the 19 were, incidentally, Saudi Arabians.
2) The Taliban offered to give us bin Laden, if we stopped bombing. Bush refused.
3) If this were really just about getting al Qaeda, we could have done that with special forces. Bush screwed up by leaving Tora Bora.
4) The Taliban brought stability to a country that had not seen that in decades, at least. Would you, I or most anybody have wanted THAT type of stability? Not on your life. But "not liking" someone's government does not give license to overthrow it and kill thousands of civilians in the process.

If this were really about "getting the bad guys," we could have done that. We didn't. Instead, we killed thousands upon thousands of people, all to satisfy George Bush's, now Barack Obama's, and apparently your, bloodlust.

[stevenleser]

256. Like I said, Good Luck with that one. You are gonna need it.

[Grinchie]

262. Oooh, we're quivering in fear.. Hah hah hah!

Tell me of your experiences after you ship out to Afganistan and return in 8 years.

[stevenleser]

265. Like I said to the other guy, good luck revising history n/t

[FedUp_Queer]

270. You really have no idea what you are talking about.

I checked on you Messr. Leser. A journalist? Pshaw. You're nothing but a Faux News toadie. You love death and destruction. I'd love to send you a few million coupons for some really good soap to clean all that blood off your hands. Not only that, I would love to inject you with some courage to tell the 2 year old son whose father died to satisfy your insatiable appetite for blood and death why exactly he no longer has a father. What a coward you are...a sick, blood thirsty coward.

[Grinchie]

273. Wow, one liner post number three..

What you get paid for those,? about 23 cents?

[Grinchie]

261. Nice Strawman, but it shows how stupid you are.

What grade are you in? Seventh?

[stevenleser]

266. Hey, if you want to try to revise history, be my guest. n/t

[Name removed]

271. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Grinchie]

260. Shhh, it makes the "Good" vs "Evil" meme break down for the propaganda it was..

Don't you know that as long as we believe the Taliban is "Universally Hated", that we can use whatever force is necessary to turn the country into glass? Get with the program!

Plus, those heathens live in mud huts, so they are all Taliban and deserve to be murdered by Predator drones under the control of some pimply faced kid sitting in a cubicle at Homestead AFB in Florida...

[Grinchie]

259. Ah yes, an empty, vapor filled one line response.

Thanks for showing your true knowledge on this subject..

[stevenleser]

267. Nothing more is warranted for those attempting to revise history n/t

[Grinchie]

272. I already called you out on the one liner above...

So what's your excuse?

So far, you got nothing.

[Grinchie]

258. Don't forget the crack contingent from the US Marshall Islands!

The coalition of the Willing I believe was the brand name used at the time.

I guess you forgot about the 20 million dollars a year we were giving the Taliban through Bin Laden, along with shoulder fired Stinger missiles to shoot down those damn commie bastards we now call the Russians.

You might want to do your history research before you start talking out of a random orifice.

[stevenleser]

268. You can get as snarky with me as you want. It will not change history to read the way you want it to

read.

[Grinchie]

274. I have no need to change history, it speaks for itself

It appears that you are all riled up for some reason, but are unable to convey it is any meaningful fashion.

I'm not here to make your point for you, especially when you are unable to type for more than a few words other than a simplistic, childish attack or Strawman.

However, my work here is done. You have exposed yourself as the shill you are, and as empty as a used hatbox.

BTW, the definition of snark is a one line response from a dolt such as yourself that is unable to come up with anything resembling intelligent thought.

Keep Posting though, I'll be here and if I see your BS again I'll make a point of responding.. It's just the way I am.

[hay rick]

136. Hypotheses restated and expanded.

1. The US is guilty of creating useless carnage in the Middle East.
2. Releasing the leaked documents MAY lead to more deaths in Afghanistan.
3. Not releasing the documents MAY have lead to EVEN MORE deaths by helping to prolong the conflict.

Your turn.

[Recursion]

137. All three could be true

Informants named in the documents are more likely to be killed now than they were before the leak.

That doesn't change #1 or #3.

[superconnected]

222. How about #3 - leaking the documents could help stop the carnage

and save far more lives than it puts in danger - the REAL intent and most likely outcome of the documents.

[joeglow3]

122. Count me as one

When they can redact names (and not put the people and their families at risk) and still release the documents, but chose to NOT redact them, I say they have blood. The same end could have been acheived without potential putting so many at risk.

[MH1]

199. What you said.

But, I am not convinced yet that it is ONLY the release of certain names that is problematic. However that is SUFFICIENT to make it vile as well as treasonous (by Manning and any coalition collaborators ... guess that would include Assange).

The issues everyone is cheering about light being shed on, have been well known and are old news. What further will be gained by publishing these documents? Particularly in a way that clearly undermines the mission?

It is one thing to work to turn public opinion against the war. It is completely another to outright undermine the soldiers fighting it and to actively work against the mission. And there is a word for that last, and I am waiting to see when it will finally be used.

[FedUp_Queer]

241. WTF?

The mission? Are you kidding me? I'm glad you brought that up. I was hoping someone could explain to me how a foreign occupier (US) could do anything in said foreign country. Does Vietnam ring a bell? How many Afghans have we killed? How many fatherless or motherless children? How many families without uncles, aunts, grandparents, brothers, sisters? My God, Wiki gave the White House the opportunity to look at the document for just this purpose and they refused? The best part is this: I can't wait to see how our government charges an Australian national for treason.

[Fool Count]

129. In fact, it is very easy to argue (and is very likely true) that

publication of those files will result in less blood, not more. And it does it
exactly via exposure of the US informants, since most blood there resulted from
operations of the occupation troops based on intelligence from those very
informants. Not only the exposed informers will be less likely to cause any further
bloodshed, the publication will discourage many new potential collaborators and
save even more lives. Not to mention that the military itself cognizant of possible
future exposure will be less likely to commit further crimes in the course of their
operations. Furthermore, it is also easy to argue that the publication was the best
thing anyone could have done for the exposed informers too. Instead of staying in
Afghanistan risking their lives on a daily basis for very little reward, they will
(if US has any decency at all) be resettled with all their families in a much safer
location, most likely the US, and can ensure peaceful and prosperous lives for their
loved ones. It is a win-win no matter how you look at this. The blood of any informers
actually killed by the Taliban (and after all that time I have yet to hear of any) will
be totally on the hands of their American handlers, who had all the power (and, no doubt,
advanced knowledge) to have saved them. And all that even leaves aside the argument that
some particularly bloody collaborators may very well deserved some form of retribution
for their crimes.

[ezdidit]

156. Exactly, Raster.

But "fucking disgusting" doesn't begin to cover it. There are several prerequisite moral deviations that one must cross first, in order to become warring scum.

First, one must believe in war as an absolute. That war in its purest and most barbaric form is always justifiable, no matter casus belli. That is, one must be able to say that if my neighbor has what I want, it is my right to take it by whatever force is necessary. If my neighbors yell at me, curse me out, call me names, it is my right to destroy them all.

And, further, if a small extremist contingent of these neighbors burns down a house of mine killing thousands of my innocents, I may absolutely do anything I want with them for as long as I choose, though I could destroy them ten times over. I may make them suffer and grieve for decades, and I may foment even more wretched, extremist contingents among them even when a majority of my own people decry the disproportion and irrationality.

It is finally this violation of the popular will that justifies wikileaks and anything that Julian Assange can do to destabilize and defeat the perpetual warring monsters among us.

We were mislead and went to do disproportionate war on terror based on frightening lies. It is time to bring that war to a close by absolutely any means possible.

Warmongers have no morals. They are evil children and must be disciplined. So, I would say, at this time, damn McMullen and Gates. Damn them to hell. If and when we the people need them for real defense of our nation, we will then find other McMullens and Gateses to do our dirty work. But until then, damn them to hell. The end of their racket is now overdue.

[superconnected]

221. +1000

[dotymed]

17. Sickening

Leaking evidence of criminality and corruption, not to mention the innocent deaths, should be hailed as Heroic. Instead, "our" government and so many twisted sycophants, want to kill the messenger.
If world history survives the "American domination and oppression" era, the history books will probably consider this to be one of the most horrific periods ever.
I believe, if the truth ever comes out, that this era, which began after WWII, will rank up there with the Holocaust.
It is a terrible time in the history of mankind to exist. What really boggles my mind (as I believe it will future generations) is the people who "go along" with the government (even though most have no idea what is actually happening) and even staunchly defend it, just the way that most Germans did during the early Nazi era.
IMO, the Bush and Cheney families will be found to be significant players in this affair.
It became evident during the Reagan years that things were "not right", and it has continued under both official political parties.
Again, IMO, "they" must have knowledge of an upcoming "end of the world" event, that allows them to rationalize their behavior......
Maybe I need a tinfoil hat....

[dixiegrrrrl]

83. "if the truth ever comes out"

History is written by the winners, remember?

Daniel Ellsberg got publicity with the Pentagon Papers because the New York Times was willing to print them.

Woodward and Bernstein broke Watergate because Time, The New York Times, and especially The Washington Post, published the story.

Today, currently, a few internet papers will give justice to these stories, but the millions who only watch MSM tv
or read newspaper headlines will never hear about it.

You don't need a tinfoil hat. This is reality.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

205. ELLSBERG SUPPORTS WIKILEAKS AFGHAN OCCUPATION DAIRIES

calls it a "shot across the bow" of the Obama administration.


ELLSBERG SUPPORTS WIKILEAKS AFGHAN OCCUPATION DAIRIES
...
Daniel Ellsberg agrees that The Wikileaks Afghan Occupation Diaries will join the Vietnam Pentagon Papers as a turning point of moral truth in the current Afghanistan stalemate ~ which also cannot answer the two key questions as to why are we there and why are we continuing this expensive exercise in futility.

The Wikileaks Afghan Occupation Diaries are a shot across the bow of the Obama Administration. On Wednesday, Democratic Sens. Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin) and Jim Webb (D-Virginia) sent a letter to the White House asking President Obama to refrain from making any major commitments to Afghanistan without the consent of the Senate "We do not believe that a long-term, open-ended presence of U.S. military forces in Afghanistan serves our national interest," the senators wrote.

As a senator, Obama supported a similar request sent to President Bush in 2007 regarding Iraq ~ but the publication of the Wikileak Dairies appears to be having the same effect as the pentagon papers had with the Vietnam conflict.

Before WikiLeaks, before the Afghanistan war, before the Internet, a defense analyst named Daniel Ellsberg rocked America in 1971 when he leaked to the newspapers of the day a top-secret study of US decisionmaking in Vietnam. The documents came to be known as the 'Pentagon Papers.
Ellsberg was also castigated by the financial elite as well as various Senators and Congressman but his papers laid bare the truth of a Vietnam quagmire mired in denial and ineptitude.

more here
http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2010/07/31/ellsberg-supports-wikileaks-afghan-occup

[burnsei sensei]

257. +1 nt

[Enthusiast]

38. And now the MIC is in control. nt

[truedelphi]

105. Also, it is not clear the manner by which the leaks would

Hurt any of the troops.

All 90,000 pages of the docs were vetted to make sure the operations that were detailed are already finished. Fifteen thousand pages of documents were held back, as the ops are still current.

Yet the yammering syncophants are probably far more worried about damage to the Defense Contractor Industry should the public finally rise up and demand that the Wars stop.

[backtomn]

114. BIG NEWS.......Careful......we now know more about Pvt. Manning

We now know that he is openly gay, anti-military (weird), and opposed "Don't ask, don't tell" (available on his Facebook page). While I might support the end to that and agree with him, I do not want important information leaked in that crusade. There may be some Afghan informants (likely) and NATO soldiers (possible) dying for this. I don't support their dying for this cause. SORRY.

Is it OK that our soldiers die to change "don't ask don't tell"??? I say.....try something different.

[obxhead]

115. Is it ok that 10000's of innocent Afghan's die for a pipeline?

This war needs to be ended NOW and if this helps all the better.

[backtomn]

148. I guess your answer is "YES".....

Our soldiers SHOULD die for "Don't ask, don't tell". Nice. I THANK YOU FOR CANDOR. I think that you are $@*&%$@# but Thanks.

It is always amazing how when the Taliban kill tens of thousands, people like you are silent....but American soldiers dying for your cause is more than OK. PITIFUL !!

There is clearly a better way than this. Don't give in to this hatred.

[obxhead]

157. Your position is that a few American lives are worth far more than

10,000's of thousands of Afghan lives.

How very humane of you. In my eyes that makes you a $@*&%$@# to the tenth power.

[backtomn]

158. Nice red herring........pitiful

Even these documents said that about 200 innocents were killed......not tens of thousands. This is a war and people die....but most of the people that are dying are THE ENEMY.....HELLO. If you oppose killing the enemy, OK.....but have the stones to say so. The Taliban were Afghan lives......in your view they should live?? That's fine, but very different from the position you have been taking.

The vast majority of this country believes that this was a "good war", including your President. If you disagree, that is fine, maybe noble......but BE HONEST.....say it......"I don't want us to fight or win in Afghanistan". If you are more HONEST we will know where you stand.

[obxhead]

161. wtf are you talking about?

Win in Afghanistan? You can't possibly be serious.

This war is not about saving Afghanistan.

I'll be dead clear. We need to pull every last troop out of that country right now. Send the planes and bring them home. No more BS killing for both sides in a pointless stalemate that has no "win" possible for either side.

You claim to value American lives and then go on to completely contradict that statement by obviously supporting this war.

I think you might just be on the wrong site.

[backtomn]

162. Pulling out......not currently an option.....

You said that you want to pull out......that's fine....but you didn't answer my question. Nice try. Chicken****.

We are in Afghanistan.....Obama is NOT pulling them out. So the stance of "Pull Them Out" is irrelevant, whether it is a good idea or not.

The questions are........is it better that Americans die than the Taliban?? Do you want to win or lose?? Should information that puts our soldiers and informants at risk be a good thing?? Leaving is not currently an option.....so where do you stand??...

Here is one good question......if you had a choice of an American soldier living or a member of the Taliban living (assuming they were in a fight), where do you stand?? Right now.....I would guess that you support the Taliban. Feel free to correct me.

My guess is that you don't want to answer these questions.....again.

[obxhead]

202. I did answer your question, you just didn't like the answer.

"is it better that Americans die than the Taliban??"

That's a straw man at best. The answer is both are dying from this war pointlessly. We can stay another 100 years and when we finally leave things will progress back to where they have been in this region for 1000's of years.

"Do you want to win or lose??"

Another straw man. There is no such thing as a win. This is obvious as neither the Bush admin or the Obama admin has had an ability to describe what a "victory" condition is. The fact that they can't is proof that there is no such thing as a "win" in this war.

"Should information that puts our soldiers and informants at risk be a good thing??"

This is rather amusing in itself coming from you. Down thread you state "I don't think that we gain from this....in part because the documents don't tell us much" so here you claim so many Americans will die from these documents, only to say not moments later that there really wasn't much in all those documents. So it seems with you that it's either the end of the world or a pointless exercise with these docs.

"Leaving is not currently an option.....so where do you stand??..."

Leaving IS an option. I'm sick and tired of the argument that if we leave the world will collapse. They said the EXACT same thing with Vietnam. If we leave now the evil red commies will take over the world. If you read or remember your history we lost that war pulling out the last troops under heavy fire. Not only did the evil red commies never take over as predicted, Vietnam is a close trading partner today. History of the Afghan region does not bare out the conclusion that pulling out today will result in the end of the world problem. Yeah, some multinational corporations would lose some money and potential gold mine of profit but people dying on either side of this war are not worth that in my opinion.

"Here is one good question......if you had a choice of an American soldier living or a member of the Taliban living (assuming they were in a fight), where do you stand?? Right now.....I would guess that you support the Taliban. Feel free to correct me."

Again, you are simply reading what you want to read and not paying attention to the situation in the region. I want to end the fucking war and stop the killing of both sides in this war. We are not there for the freedom of Afghans. We are not there to "fight them there so we don't fight them here." Obama continues that false meme from the Bush admin, but in REALITY we are there only for resources and the continued profit of multinational corporations. I don't want to see 1 more American die for that. I do not want to see one more American kill for that.

So I suggest you go find a soldiers mother and explain that you fully support the continued killing on both sides because we gotta "win". In 9 years I have yet to have a single person describe a win that can not be done by sending fleets of planes and ships and pulling each and every troop out in the next 2 weeks.

[FedUp_Queer]

243. I never thought I would actually see what I'm seeing.

A person with absolutely no conscience. I'm astounded. I want every last GD soldier out...ALL OF THEM!!!!!!!!!

We lost 66 troops in Afghanistan in July...the bloodiest f-ing month. Corporal LDH* Jr. was 24 when he lost his life on July 1, 2010. He left behind his wife, brother and both parents. Private First Class JG* killed on July 1, 2010 left behind a wife, a 6 year old daughter, a brother and both parents. Private First Class DAJ* killed on July 2, 2010, left behind a wife, a two year old son, his brother and father. How many Christmases are gone, how many birthdays, Thanksgivings, graduations, football games for those kids, little league games, proms, anniversaries? I honor these young men. I honor their families. But, my God man, when does it stop? When is the death and destruction enough? What would you tell a 6 year old daughter or a 2 year old son?

Where do I stand? BRING THEM HOME NOW!!! No more widows. No more fatherless kids. No more missed birthdays or missed Christmases. No more empty places at the dinner table and at the Holidays.

*Out of respect, I've left their names off and given just initials. If you want to look them up, feel free to do so. You can find casualties by day.

[superconnected]

224. Excuse me, in fact only 3500 troops have died in combat, the other 1000 in non-combat deaths.

http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/

It's our troops who have killed 10's of thousands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

to ignore those 10's of thousands of deaths and act like a few thousand on the other side is more important is truly pitiful.

[FedUp_Queer]

242. Are you kidding? ARE YOU F-ING KIDDING????

WE SUPPORTED THE GD TALIBAN!!!!!!!!!!!!! MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!! By the way, there is NO evidence of the Taliban killing "tens of thousands." In fact, our glorious efforts have killed thousands.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=31636&Cr=a...

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3556

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/west_asia/37021.stm

My God...I get it. "Their" lives are worse less than "our" lives. Cool...I'm glad we've got that straight. Remind me again...what exactly did the Taliban do to me? To you? To this country? This is not about don't ask don't tell. This is about trying to end billions and billions and billions and billions of dollars all going to support death and the murder of thousands of men, women and children.

[gaspee]

121. Oh please

Blame it on the gays - I am so fucking sick of people like you.

[backtomn]

149. Did I blame gays??? !!

Nice red herring. I am sick of people like you.....trying to gain advantage by this kind of crap. Maybe you should take a remedial reading course. Demagogue.

[gaspee]

204. You're funny

And not in a hahaha sort of way. Why don't you reread your own posts for demagoguery - why aren't you in the military fighting in these wars if you support them so much.

And calling people chickenshit (like you did in a couple of places in this thread) and browbeating and attacking people all over the thread is exactly the type of behavior pro-war neanderthals always exhibit.

People like you (meaning ones who support endless war and believe Afghanistan is winnable) will be the death of this country. We will be financially and morally bankrupt.

You still make me want to puke.

Oh, and you are lying to boot. Do you come from the Breitbart school of fact-checking?

[Historic NY]

128. I'd say he just cost DADT advocates a lots of grief...it shows a breach of trust..

which the other side will argue is why they should be excluded from service.

[Divine Discontent]

131. IT'S THE GAYS! IT'S THE GAYS! It couldn't POSSIBLY be that some people are disgusted by the....

SCATTERED BODY PARTS of babies and children strewn about on the streets, while hard rock music blares in the ears of the overhead fighter pilots. I am Gay, but I am not at ALL opposed to this war because of DADT. The Gay people who want in the military knew what they were getting into when they joined - little kids in the streets of Afghanistan didn't sign up to be used as the receiving end of an explosive device. And frankly, isn't 1100 dead American soldiers enough? This month was the DEADLIEST on record for American soldiers... real. f*cking. nice.


for what????

[backtomn]

151. Actually......he is saying that it IS about the gays

I think that I mentioned that. That is NOT ME saying it. It is always nice to see people turn on their own, when NO principle exists. Shouldn't we be able to point out a screw up.....gay or straight?? Apparently not.....too many sacred cows at stake.

Many should die so that gays can fight......nice place to make a stand. Can anyone else see how silly this is??? Let's preserve the right of gays to kill people in Afghanistan. I am with you. ; )

[Divine Discontent]

152. you have a valid point, I do not argue that (about the guy), but I'm saying, even if what he's doing

it for is another cause, it still begs to ask - isn't what the war doing far far far worse than what this guy is doing? I say yes.

[backtomn]

154. I say "no".....

but I appreciate your very calm, reasoned question. You are clearly someone with which I can talk.

I don't think that we gain from this....in part because the documents don't tell us much.....but two wrongs don't make a right.

I think that the real answer will come if this actually changes policy. I will be watching.

[backtomn]

155. Would love to hear more about what you think

I am open to more thoughts......but, right now, I disagree.

However, it is nice to hear from someone that says what they think, without precipitating into insults or "garbage".

Thanks.

[Divine Discontent]

237. thank you! same to you.

[superconnected]

223. As my brother says, he supports the troops but not the war.

Many of the troops have now said they support the leak because they feel it will get them out of their faster - hence they will be safer.

[boppers]

278. "Anti-current US military" is not "anti-military".

Those are very different things.

[Turborama]

281. There is a third type, those that leak for revenge

There are also another types, those who egotistically do it as a power trip and those who do it just for shits 'n giggles.

There could be more motives than that, but those are 3 additional types you can add to your list.

[cosmicone]

11. +1 nt

[Warren Stupidity]

30. And your concern for the hundreds of thousands we have killed?

vs the hypothetical danger presented by these documents, documents which our government refused an offer to review prior to their release?

Yes far better that we stick with the official story. That way only 'bad guys' get killed.

[ixion]

42. My concern? They were human beings killed with my tax dollars

that is my concern.

[Grinchie]

145. Exactly.. I will not pay Taxes that go for Wars.

It just isn't going to happen, and it is very challenging and life changing when one makes an oath to avoid any taxable income as a sign of protest of these inhuman, unnecessary war games.

I have followed through on my oath for almost 9 years now, and even though I am now forced to live simply and within my means, I have learned how to provide for me and my family all of the necessities of life. I am so grateful that I started early in the decade, and now know exactly what it takes to life a happy, healthy life on pennies a day if necessary.

It is only when the tax revenue dries up that the Government will be put under pressure, and when that pressure builds up, the first thing that disappears are Social Services, uncorrupted judicial system, law enforcement, Mail service, your Social Security, etc. We never see meaningful cuts in the Military Industrial complex, and when we do see the cuts, it's for fat bloated, unserviceable pigs like the F-22 Raptor, which already sapped over 20 billion dollars over decades..

The best way to protest is by finding ways to escape the income tax trap the Government has laid for us unsuspecting gullible consumers..

[24601]

200. Taxes are fungible, like oil. I checked and your taxes are paying

only for veterans health care. :sarcasm: I tracked mine and right now they are paying the salary of the Executive Officer in a fast attack sub. As a retired army guy that really pisses me off and I'm requesting that they be switched to paying for tank ammunition.

[Grinchie]

263. It doesn't matter, the Fed will just print more to make up for it.

Eventually, the whole money printing scheme is going to run out of steam, as well as the Military running out of gullible, desperate conscripts.

I read yesterday that 35% of the Medical Facilities available to Veterans in 1987 are now shut down, yet the number of Veterans still using the system remains at the same level as it was in 1987. So the whole Space Availability scheme of free health care for Veterans has shrunk to the point where fewer Veterans actually get health care, or they have to travel miles out of their way.

I noticed this after my service, and basically found that the medical care promised by my enlistment contract was medical care in name only, and it was a pretty frightening ordeal to use this so called "Benefit". In fact, I was never able to successfully use the VA for any medical problem that came up, and I am thnkful that I remain healthy and never really needed it.

As far as the salary on that fast attack sub, well, just remember Freedom Isn't Free!, and he is most likely securing the perimeter for Kandahar right now, using the Sonar to spot Taliban warlords in the Salt lakes in the vicinity. :sarcasm:

[bitchkitty]

65. I think you misread his post. n/t

[sabrina 1]

79. I think the comment agrees with you. At least that's how I

read it ~

[Warren Stupidity]

104. never mind - my lack or reading comprehension. nt

[backtomn]

153. Kill more to save more.......logical

Hundreds of thousands killed in Afghanistan....nice hyperbole. Let's deal in FACTS.

I did not forgive our government for its actions......and if you heard that.....please point out where I said that !!!!

TWO WRONGS DO NOT MAKE A RIGHT........I don't give a >>>> what you say.

Focus on these issues one at a time......or you look like you hate the military....unless that is true?? ??

[cprise]

194. I would say

...that people like he and I hate the military-industrial complex, and hate imperialism. That should also be a given on this site, so your browbeating looks out of place (just sayin...)

A better question is whether you love imperialism? DO YOU??? Is that even in your vocabulary?

[superconnected]

226. Okay 10's of thousands.

Facts:

Afghanistan Civilian Deaths:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_of_the_War_in_Afghanistan_%282001%E2%80%93present%29

US Soldier deaths: 1215

http://www.icasualties.org/

You must really hate civilians.

[Enthusiast]

37. Sure is disgusting. nt

[pleah]

67. What's really disgusting is

Our government condoning torture and assassinations of it's own citizens, among other atrocities.

[burnsei sensei]

255. Don't flatter yourself that you know

that much.
The documents were not at a very high level of clearance and applied only to the recent past.

[dipsydoodle]

2. Makes sense

Rec'd.

[hlthe2b]

3. well, if his insurance is meant to "blackmail" in order to secure

himself, I hope that extends to the leaker, now facing court martial. I'm not saying it is always acceptable to do this kind of thing, but had the Penagon Papers not been "leaked," how much longer would we have been in Vietnam--how many more tens of thousands have died?

[No Elephants]

4. The American public is shock-proof nowadays and Gravel retired.

And, perhaps most signficant, Congress abolished the draft in 1973.

Now, instead of worrying about our children serving against their will, we need only worry about someone else's children and the U.S. Treasury.

Compelling, yes, but apparently not as compelling as the prospect of burying your own child after a respectful young person hands you the flag from the coffin, neatly folded into a triangular shape. Or worrying who will bathe your paralyzed child when you are no longer able.

Whatever else may happen with Rangel, he deserves credit for trying to reinstate the draft. It's the only way the warmongers will be accountable. But, he failed, and both Parties voted for the endless war against terra.

Pentagon Papers. Brave, pivotal action. Wikileaks? See Reply #1.

[tomp]

35. rangel deserves no such credit.

the draft is a an abhorrent system of involuntary servitude to the MIC and only has ever existed to force people to support unpopular wars. rangel's suggestion that it will prevent war or create accountability is ludicrous, not born out by history, and is similar to obama's 3D chess moves. it very well might, however, increase resistance to war among the draftable, but that is not good enough reason to institute it.

[patrice]

45. Right! A Draft will CAUSE more Wars. People are too easily cowed; there won't be enough of them

who become War Resisters to make a difference. It's waaaaaay too late for any of that to work at this point.

[stevenleser]

247. Not borne out by history? Vietnam ended much sooner than Afghanistan

One could argue because of the draft. I wouldnt argue that, but I'll bet someone could put a convincing argument behind it.

You could add to that argument that we seem to have many more wars since the draft ended than we did with the draft.

[caseymoz]

43. If the draft hadn't been abolished, it would have died by exemptions.

The MIC was going to dictate policy draft or not. It was reasonable to assume at the time that getting rid of the draft would undercut its power and fodder source. I mean, after Vietnam, how could it not? Instead, it proved to be very adaptable.

It's ironic and probably not coincidental that the MIC is really about just what the communists would have said: the transfer of wealth from the poor to the wealthy, not just domestically, but internationally, and by the most brutal means.

[chervilant]

59. hmm...

The MIC created a viable alternative to the draft, one about which we seldom hear opposition. The MIC knows that our pathetic system of public education (another of their bright ideas) and radical income inequity (need I lay THAT at their doorstep?) make for a significant number of young men and women who have almost no other options for viable employment. Couch the "we'll pay you AND put you through college" meme in patriotism and glory (the military will make a MAN out of you!), and a significant number of the offspring of low-income families will away to war.

If we can break through the bipartisan crap promulgated by the MIC's propaganda machine, maybe, just maybe we'll see a techno-revolution in my lifetime. However, I'm not holding my breath.

[northernlights]

27. maybe his "insurance" is intended to make certain

that if he is detained or renditioned or murdered, the dirty little secrets contained in that file won't get buried with him.

[girl gone mad]

5. He wouldn't need to distribute the key.

All he has to do is will it to those he trusts.

[stuart68]

63. Are you serious ?

Many, many people have stepped in to alter wills after peoples death to suit a different purpose.

[superconnected]

6. The informat names being released are either a lie or the Militarys fault-

"The top whistle blower, also criticized the US for “sloppy” and “unprofessional” security. WikiLeaks only uses code names internally for sources. Assange criticised the accessibility of the documents, saying, the information, including names of informants, “was available to every member of the U.S. military and every U.S. contractor — not just in Afghanistan — but all over the world. The military has acted in a disgraceful and careless way.”

This view was supported by Robert Berry, a former CIA officer, “It’s plain sloppy, there is no other interpretation of it,” adding that, “you never, never, never have the names of informants” in reports that are widely accessible."


---------------
I know something was wrong with having their names in files because I've worked at a place with undercover people and their real names were NEVER used in the paper work and that wasn't nearly as important as informants in another country.

[sabrina 1]

82. It is sloppy, assuming they did include that information.

I thought that maybe the names were false, as I could not believe they would be so careless. Then, angry over the exposure of the lies etc. I thought they might be pretendeding they were real.

But, I guess I was wrong. They really are that careless, especially with the lives of Afghans as we well know, and the troops who they do not care about no matter how many yellow ribbons and flags they wave.

[McCamy Taylor]

8. Eeeks! I accidently unrec'd this one! Please add 2 to the total.

My coffee has not kicked in yet. This was supposed to be a K&R not a mea culpa.

"Knowledge will set you free."

[Kurovski]

80. Added. I wasn't going to+. (nt)

[CLANG]

160. Thanks for reminding me to rec!!

[xchrom]

9. recommend

[drm604]

10. Interesting.

I have to wonder if it's a bluff. Even if it is, it's a clever move, and those in power may think twice about going after Assange or Wikileaks because it could be real.

Another possibility is that it really is something that could very much compromise some powerful people, and those people may have been sent the key so that they know what's at stake.

[HEyHEY]

12. How long before the government starts leaking false information to wikileaks?

Easy way to justify alot of things.

[harun]

13. I'm sure they have been for a long time. Standard disinformation stuff.

[glitch]

23. That's why wikileaks spends a lot of time confirming the info they release. nt

[seattleblue]

101. Yeah, they are really going to be able to confirm 93,000 pages

of military field reports from Afghanistan written over the last 9 years.

[glitch]

110. People kept asking for months why it was taking them so long to process the pages.

This was their answer.

[seattleblue]

111. So they went to Afghanistan and checked out the 93,000 pages and all the sources.

Maybe they phoned them up or googled them on the internet. LOL

[lib2DaBone]

46. Bingo.... Correct.

[sabrina 1]

85. Julian Assange spoke about that in an interview recently.

He gave an example of having information they could not confirm so did not publish. They ended up getting confirmation from someone who was trying to prevent them from publishing it but accidentally confirmed that that the information was legitimate. Then they published it.

He's very smart, but he's up against some powerful forces and his own government is being pressured now to go after him. He could go to Iceland where whistle-blowers are completely protected. Still doesn't mean he would be safe though.

[another saigon]

15. at this point who would believe any Military Statement?

I have not heard an honest one in decades.

K&R for the brave whistle blowers!

[stray cat]

16. When does he get to leak the bank accounts and SS # of Americans?

since he clearly just likes to find and download stuff. He doesn't even know what is in the files!

[Boxerfan]

18. Ohhhh Kaaaayyyy...You think he didn't know what was in the files?

Little paranoid or just an old French writer-Dumass?

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

19. you need greater reading comprehension

The article does not say Assange does not know what is in the file.

[FedUp_Queer]

109. In fact...

He gave the government the opportunity to look at them before release to protect the identities of people (such as informants, etc.). Those are the actions of a reckless, find them and release them person. Damn, I'm really coming to dislike the apparent Obama toadies.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mbperrin]

21. The government already does this. Here's just one example:

http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/15/cybersecurity-government-ferriero-technology-cio-network-nara.html

When David Ferriero was named head of the federal government's National Archive and Records Agency last month, he didn't just become America's most important librarian. He also took on one of the toughest tasks in government IT today: plugging the source of a continual stream of information leaks, including what may have been the biggest federal data breach of all time.



No idea what you mean by he doesn't even know what's in the files. Crimes are in the files, by the thousand, and jailtime minimum is deserved by many in those files, not that it will happen with TPTB.

[SheilaT]

51. Many years ago I had a student intern job

with the Army Archives dept in DC. One of the jobs of this department was to set standards for all army records everywhere in the world as to exactly what should be retained and for how long. The army was just entering the computer age (this was 1980, so they were a bit behind the computer curve), and one of the projects I worked on was a survey that had been sent out to all army installations around the world inquiring just what kind of computerized records they already had.

But millions and millions of documents existed in paper form, of course. I can tell you from my personal experience, there was little control over those documents, and I was aware of ones walking out the door. Noe of those documents were classified -- they were actually just the school records from schools on army posts -- but nonetheless it bothered me a lot that some people were being so casual about the records.

But here's probably the most important thing that was going on at that office. Now this was the place that set the standards and devised the manuals for how to deal with every conceivable kind of record they generated. And because I kept on being annoyingly efficient at the tasks I was set, they one day gave me the task of updating the manuals that set the world-wide standards for record storage and retention. That job actually kept me busy for nearly two weeks. Why? They had last been updated TWELVE years earlier, in 1968. When I was done with the updating I went into the head of the department (He was a GS-17, I was a GS-2, a job category so low I don't think they even use it anymore)and with much trepidation on my part suggested he assign specific manuals to specific people in the office (there were three separate manuals, as I recall) and then periodically follow up to make sure the updates were actually inserted in the manuals.

I have often wondered when, if ever, the manuals were updated.

[Forkboy]

25. That's impressive, even by your standards.

:crazy:

[Warren Stupidity]

31. you have no clue what wikileaks is about.

again another massive concern for hypothetical harm as we stand knee deep in real blood.

[jberryhill]

44. Assange has attacked individuals before

He is not someone you want to piss off.

After Enom, an Internet domain registrar, made an error handling a court order in the UBS case, he published a variety of personal information about every employee of the company be could find.

He can be quite vindictive, and is not someone you'd want to cross.

[24601]

139. Tell the families in Afghanistan that they are just hypothetical. It's

already a daily struggle there to survive - now add their names being published for cooperating with the US forces. The hypothetical Taliban aren't known for their forgiveness and compassion.

[Bluenorthwest]

36. even for you, a vapid comment

As if you did not read the post at all. Daft.

[Lorien]

116. Nah, about average as far as that one goes. nt

[sabrina 1]

86. He never said he didn't know what was in the files. In fact,

because of the sensitive nature of the files, he gave the Military the option to read them and offer suggestions on what should be redacted for the safety of individuals.

They played the same game the WH played with Dan Rather. When RAther sent his story to the WH for comment before airing it, they did not respond leading to the conclusion there was nothing they could refute. In this case, no safety issues.

If anyone is endangered by these documents, it is the fault of the military on every level, from using real names in documents that were not top secret and for refusing to review them. But mostly for being there, in Afghanistan and Iraq to begin with.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

217. Just after he starts selling child porn, I guess.

:eyes:

[superconnected]

227. It doesn't say he doesn't know what in the files, but your reading comprehension explains everything

that you've been typing.

[Ignis]

264. Gosh, it sounds like you have a real in-depth understanding of WikiLeaks.

:eyes:

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/WikiLeaks:About

[jimmil]

22. The biggest secrets leaked are...

...those secrets the military and civilians in the mid-east kept from the United States citizens. It proves that the powers that be have lied, covered up, suppressed anything coming from the war zones that may put them in a bad light. We have all firmly suspected that the news we got was washed about a million times before we got it. Everyone knew something was wrong because in a war a lot of people die and most of the dying is done by civilians and not the military. This was was different because we used precision munitions. They only killed the bad guys. We all knew this was absolute bullshit. Now we have the evidence that our government officials lied and they should be called to justify or explain themselves.

My only reservations about this whole thing are whether someone today will suffer repercussions. I would have hoped someone would have gone through the documents and edit out names and specific dates and times in order to protect those alive today.

[Poll_Blind]

24. Well, duh. He's on more hit lists than the pope! It is the next logical step.

He's just preparing for the possibility that he is assassinated or abducted.

He's pissed off the U.S. military for shit's sake. You think all the folks who have been burned by the release of that information aren't already chatting with each other about ways to make him disappear and/or frighten more whistleblowers from sharing information with WikiLeaks?

PB

[SpiralHawk]

26. Shrewd move

k and r

[Poll_Blind]

28. BTW, what a great way to get everybody and their brother to download the file.

Wikileaks + Assange + Encrypted file called "Insurance" anyone can download = Everybody and their brother downloading a copy and...waiting.

PB

[drm604]

32. That's a very good point.

Put it up, everybody downloads it, then release the key in numerous places. At that point there is no way in hell it can be blocked or censored in any way.

[democrat2thecore]

73. You probably just solved the mystery

If Wikileaks is ever somehow unable to publish that info, he only has to release the key and - presto!

You may very well be right on target.

[derby378]

87. And here's the grabber...

Some folks aren't going to wait for the key. I know there's a few hackers trying to crack the code at this very moment.

It can take millions of years to crack the code with a really fast computer. But then again, searching through all those permutations, a computer could get lucky and mine its first nuggets within a week or so. And the chance of this happening increases with each hacker who is willing to dedicate a "Deep Thought" console to tacking this code.

[Posteritatis]

94. Brute-forcing it ain't gonna happen

It took a decent-sized chunk of the net five years to do 64-bit and it took them almost all of the possible keyspace to do it; the difference between 2^64 keys and 2^256 keys is, well, substantial.

[Towlie]

130. You can get the file in just a few minutes with a Torrent file from Pirate Bay.

... if you have decent Internet bandwidth.

1. Search for "Wikileaks Insurance" on Pirate Bay or one of the other torrent sites.
2. Download the torrent file and then use it to download the insurance.aes256 file.
3. Get the http://support.microsoft.com/kb/841290">SHA-1 checksum utility from Microsoft or any other SHA-1 cryptographic hash utility from a reputable source.
4. Go to http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Afghan_War_Diary,_2004-2010 and verify for yourself that the SHA-1 hash for insurance.aes256 should be cce54d3a8af370213d23fcbfe8cddc8619a0734c
5. Run an SHA-1 hash check on the file you downloaded and compare it to cce54d3a8af370213d23fcbfe8cddc8619a0734c to verify that it's authentic.
6. ...
7. Profit!

[democrat2thecore]

187. The one with THOUSANDS of seeders on The Pirate Bay is legitimate

What a brilliant move on Assange's part. Wait for the right time and tens of thousands have it on their computers no matter what happens to wikileaks.org OR him! (I'm sure he's got the key in a safe deposit box somewhere and somebody he trusts has the key).

edit: middle of the night and there's 21 seeders. When those computers come back on in the morning, the number of seeders will skyrocket and it will be faster to download. I just downloaded it again in 19 minutes, so that's still not too bad.

[The Stranger]

254. That's right: Someone has to be entrusted with the key in the event Assange is picked up/arrested.

Hope he left it in the right place, or enough right places.

[Swagman]

29. anyone heard if there is a defence fund the 'leaker' / hero?

[ooglymoogly]

57. Here it is....

http://www.couragetoresist.org/x/content/view/849/122/ and will give what I can

[Lydia Leftcoast]

33. All of you who are interested in this issue should read the 1970s book

The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence by Victor Marchetti, an exposé of the CIAs adventures in places like Vietnam and Chile. All writings by former CIA officials are subject to pre-publication censorship by the CIA, but Marchetti was stubborn enough to demand that his publishers SHOW exactly where the deletions were made.

There was enough damning information in there to prompt Senate investigations led by Sen. Frank Church.

Anyway, Marchetti's main thesis was that government secrecy is bullshit. The U.S. government knows what it's doing. The other side knows what the U.S. government is doing (both sides have moles). The "collateral damage" victims know what the U.S. government is doing. The "secrecy" is meant to keep the American people in the dark about what their government is up to.

This is a book that needs to be reprinted and widely read.

[lib2DaBone]

41. Good Point. We need to start asking more questisons...

Something doesn't add up with Wikileaks? Can't put my finger on it?

Could Assange actually be working FOR the CIA.. could he be releasing what they WANT released?

i.e. they release a little information.. and now comes the big lockdown... "For our own good"... to protect "Us". A complete shutdown of all media and internet coverage of the wars int he M.E.

All this as we head to war in Iran... is the CIA laying a smoke screen? You never know..

[loudsue]

60. That's exactly what I've been pondering. The MIC is positioned

to make the U.S. a military dictatorship at a moment's notice, and they don't like people electing representatives, and expecting them to pass laws in the people's best interest.

[lib2DaBone]

72. I WANT to believe that this guy is a Daniel Ellsberg...

I really do.. for our country's sake and the sake of all the young people being killed.

I just don't have a lot of faith in our elected leaders and the MIC.

They lied about WMD, they lied about Pat Tillman, they lied about Blackwater's murder of women and children in the marketplace, they lied about the $8 billion missing from Iraq, they lied about the Niger Yellow cake...

And they are LYING about their plans to attack Iran... Guaranteed!

[femrap]

81. I believe Julian is

the real thing....Secrets are being revealed.

I want to see what he has on BP.

And Goddess knows that the sexual abuse that goes on in the military is pervasive. Let's show what the Military turns our little children into.

Let's shine some light on TPTB.

Not that the millions of willfully ignorant americans watching 'american idol' and pron give a shit.

[Subdivisions]

138. You forgot one: they lied about 9/11... n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

47. thank you

99.99% of official secrets are to keep the populace ignorant of what is being one in their name and nothing else.

[SheilaT]

53. I've often said that the government

would classify the location of your butt if they thought they could do so.

[peacetalksforall]

134. Also, The Secret History of the C.I.A. - excellent in the way it showed hou the corporation,

CIA, State, military, intelligence, (and sometimes the World Bank and IMF), other government leaders, and especially THE MEDIA worked together to pulled the Allende assassination off. Great coverage of ITT and the CIA players specifically. Covered Europe and ASIA and Washington also because the CIA players moved around.

Author: Trento (?) I'll look it up to proof my memory

[ensho]

34. kick

nt

[CJvR]

39. Blackmail?

"Look at what I might have..."

[voteearlyvoteoften]

40. go assange!

[patrice]

48. Why would this be "prosecutable" and the outing of Valerie Plame is not? nt

[Poll_Blind]

50. Damned good point. n/t

PB

[patrice]

58. Increased "grave threat to the security of the U.S." is much clearer when we're talking about a WMD

expert, as compared to a variety of documents relating more or less indirectly to much more specific, potential and actual, situations.

[sabrina 1]

88. Assange is not Dick Cheney?

[DissedByBush]

112. Assange isn't American n/t

[Joanne98]

49. Whoa! I just began a fan! This guy has BALLS! I love that.

[tavalon]

52. This man is so savvy

He's also a drama queen. That said, it might just save his life.

[femrap]

84. 'drama queen?'

what are you, jealous?

See you like you using that old and tired method of insult: the worst thing you can call a boy is a girl.

It's sexist. Ever heard of that?

[tavalon]

143. Sorry, Drama King just doesn't have the same connotation

What I meant was that he tends to be splashy when less splashy might garner more respect. But, it might also garner a longer life. Geez, I said I like the guy. As a fellow whistleblower, I consider him part of an elite team. Maybe, I am a little jealous that he actually gets to do it so splashy, gets to hang the bad guys out to dry so spectacularly. Most of the rest of us have to be extremely covert and still many, if not most of us, have lost our jobs over whistleblowing and the people doing the bad stuff usually just get promoted to another place. And yet, blessedly, there is this small core who whistleblow anyway, and damn the consequences.

[femrap]

163. I rather like 'drama prince' myself.

I'm sorry you feel burned. But you should feel proud and look yourself in the mirror and say: 'Fucking brilliant." OK?

Julian is maybe a bit of Karma that we need. And I know your Karma will come back and give you a big kiss.

Whistle on! I actually for the first time in many, many, many years feel the tide turning in our favor.....and I have a good sense of trends. I knew in 1980 w/ Raygun we were done.

But now, maybe there is a light at the end of the tunnel and it's NOT an oncoming train!

Take care!

[tavalon]

195. I expect every whistleblower feels burned and there are plenty who

have been burned worse than me. Sibel Edmonds and Bradley Manning come to mind immediately.

[Posteritatis]

208. The gender-neutral "dramallama" is more fun to say. (nt)

[boppers]

280. ROFL @ dramallama

Is it a male, or female, llama?

:evilgrin:

[SheilaT]

54. He is doing what I've always said anyone in possession

of important information should do: get it out to as many people as possible.

Every so often, someone will claim to know something, or have some information that is "dangerous", that person thinks his life is in danger just for possessing that information. Or that if it's released, 'they' would go after or even kill him. I have always said in cases like that, make sure as many peopole as possible have that information. Never, never play into the keep quiet b.s.

[ooglymoogly]

55. And the truth shall set you free; Never has an old wisdom

(now apparently meaningless to the powers controlling "our" government, for the maximum profit for the few) needed a bigger megaphone.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

56. Nobody Cares

As much as this Assange character as well as the people on this board want to make these leaks the smoking gun that will end the war, well, it won't. I heard the same predictions a few months back when the video of the helicopter pilots killing the Iraqi insurgents came out. Everyone here was screaming about "war crimes" and investigations, etc. Well, the incident had been investigated and the shooting was deemed within the rules of engagement. More importantly, the video was all over the internet and the news, yet there was zero outrage outside the noise coming from the liberal interwebs.

The current wikileak documents have been out for several days now. If there was anything substantial that would cause nation wide outrage, it would have came out by now. Well, nothing outrage worthy has come out, and the public is going about its business as usual.

[lib_wit_it]

96. In fact, the video In question was a freakin' snuff tape that had more than a few RWers creaming

their jeans, with blatant perversity on public discussion boards.

[stuart68]

61. I hope he is smart enough to know that encryption is a joke

The US only allows encryption algorithms that have a back door. The "million years" is if you or I did it, not the government.

[Deadgnome]

66. I am pretty sure

This man knows exactly what he is doing. In other words, he is brilliant and he knows what he is up against.

[stuart68]

68. Maybe that is what he expected

Someone else cracks the file regardless.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

69. He's not IN the US.

He's not even an American.

:shrug:

[stuart68]

71. Not sure why that matters.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

99. You mentioned US encryption back doors

Software available elsewhere may not have such limitations built in.

[Pavulon]

146. The NSA hires the best, there in no elliptical encryption

in any domain they will not tip toe through.

[democrat2thecore]

74. That's false. There are encrypted drives the govt has not been able to decrypt

Can't disprove memes like yours, but personally, I don't think even the NSA can decrypt strong crypto.

[slampoet]

78. +1

[boppers]

103. CIA campus has a sculpture...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kryptos

The NSA still hasn't solved all of it. After 20 years. (Though they did solve the first three parts in only two years).

[Pavulon]

165. unable or unwilling?

they will not break it in a public venue. My 2 cents.

[joshcryer]

183. No, mathematically impossible using known methods.

There may be some unknown methods, but AES is unlikely to have any.

[Pavulon]

236. Same thing was said about DES in its day..

whatever they do it will not be in this venue.

[joshcryer]

244. We doubted computational progress.

And while a quantum computer could crack it, I don't think that the NSA has one.

[slampoet]

76. I don't know a single white hat hacker who uses only government approved software.

[Posteritatis]

77. LOL, right

What, exactly, is stopping me, a Canadian, from getting some strong crypto software made in, say, Italy, and passing it along to a friend in Colorado? Or, if I had some programming chops, writing the software myself?

(Of course, the real fun would be if there were one-time pads involved that the alleged supporters had, though an OTP sized for that much stuff would be a teensy bit tedious.)

[boppers]

100. As a serious answer:

The encryption software algo he used was from Belgium, and it's still a crime to export it to Iran (among other places). It's currently used as a standard in Canada and the US (among other places). We used to have *much* tighter standards on exports when most of it was US produced, but the rest of the world caught up, and the Internet rendered control nearly obsolete.

Reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wassenaar_Arrangement

[drm604]

91. Yes, I'm sure that he made sure to use an algorithm that was approved by the US government.

:sarcasm:

[boppers]

98. He did, actually.

It's one of the better ones out there, which is why it's approved for US use.

[boppers]

95. It's AES, based on Rijndael. It was developed in Belgium.

It was approved for US use *because* it was hard to crack. It's weaknesses are well known, as are it's strengths. Oh, and the "million years" part is in there for non-techies, if you'd like actual data on complexity try wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Encryption_Standard
...or your friendly local cryptographer, who can tell you that a million years of CPU time is only one year if you have a million CPU cores, and since CPU speeds aren't static, "time" is a pointless measure of crypto, used by journalists, not academics. Complexity is the proper measurement.

[Pavulon]

147. Can they tell you how many cores the NSA has?

how much NAND flash basically they have leverage and elegance to break the best in the world. For years it was the soviets, this is off the shelf.

[boppers]

175. It's really a cost issue, WRT NSA cores.

It's simply not worth the cost to brute force every AES 256 message... especially when folks like Assange can, in about half a minute, create an eternally unbreakable "message", tying up resources for years, by something as simple as a stream cypher, combined with other cyphers.

Hint: There's a reason the file is so freaking huge. Even if the stream cypher is broken (no mean feat), the message is still hidden in huge amounts of noise, so they have to test not only every stream key, but every additional possible additional algo on every single cypher result. Depending on paranoia levels, it may take multiple cyphers, times multiple cyphers, times complexity for each cypher.

[democrat2thecore]

188. With the file that big - it's another video and my theory (inside)

Why call it "insurance"? It has nothing to do with "insurance" per se. It is HIS insurance against any attacks against him or his Swedish server.

[boppers]

191. The uncertainty *is* the insurance.

It could be millions of zeros in a row, and the innocent have nothing to fear about that.

So, do the innocent fear it?

[democrat2thecore]

192. Exactly! -nt

[anigbrowl]

117. nonsense

The strength of an algorithm can be measured mathematically. An algorithm is not a piece of software, it's a computational method.

[stuart68]

220. it's based on how you generate random numbers

to support the algorithm. your comment is based on the assumption that the technique to generate the random numbers is safe/secure. that does not appear to be the case as the NSAs method was adopted...

[anigbrowl]

252. so use a different random number generator

The NSA can't mandate which method a given programmer uses, or which constants they select as seeds. I don't think you really understand this.

[Towlie]

126. Those smart enough to know encryption know that YOU are a joke.

Denial of the effectiveness of properly executed cryptography is comparable to denial of evolution or global warming. All stem from ignorance.

[stuart68]

141. Thanks - you smart folks

keep kidding yourselves.

The government has no secret programs, and everything they can do is published on wikipedia. Or do you have some special access to the most secret of programs......

Didn't think so.

[Towlie]

174. WE'RE kidding ourselves? YOU said "The US only allows encryption algorithms that have a back door."

Rijndael is an entirely open algorithm, as are all worthwhile encryption algorithms. If it had a so-called "back door" then that back door would be clearly visible to the multitude of cryptographers who have analyzed it. They worked hard for over 5 years trying to make names for themselves by discovering weaknesses in Rijndael and other algorithms, and because Rijndael beat out all of the competing algorithms in this respect it was chosen to be the Advanced Encryption Standard. (There were also other considerations, such as computing speed and efficiency.)

Saying that the U.S. government has a secret program to do what cryptographers around the world can't is about as credible as claiming they have a secret pill to turn water into gasoline.

[stuart68]

197. Thanks

I can sleep better now knowing the US govt has no secret capabilities or programs of which you are unaware.

[Posteritatis]

206. In this case it's a safe bet that they don't

There's no program that can break encryption that has one hundred and seventy-four more orders of magnitude of possible keys than there are atoms in the universe. For goodness' sake, there's a vastly simpler encrypted sculpture put there by an artist right in the middle of the CIA Headquarters' grounds that they've been working on for twenty years and still have only partially broken.

The US government cannot rewrite basic mathematics.

[stuart68]

210. unless, of course, there is a backdoor key of some sort

not like world governments do not collaborate on secretive technologies.

I am not saying this is the case, I am saying it is possible. Many thousands of people have died protecting state secrets through history, something like this could be another secret worth protecting.

how is it that some of the weirdest conspiracy theories get trumpeted here, and my theory that the government has a secret key for encryption is summarily dismissed ? Maybe it is not weird enough.

Ok, the gov't doesn't have it, we are actually in contact with alien life forms who have technology well beyond our and can dissolve encrypion in seconds.

[Posteritatis]

211. Do you know anything at all about encryption?

There's no such thing as "backdoor keys" for encryption algorithms that are wide-open known in every particular. It's just not possible. Encryption isn't a computer program, it's a method, and it's entirely possible to muddy things further by layering it or any number of other options which make it as close to mathematically impossible to break. It is not a monolith with some one-size-fits-all crack either, because if it was it wouldn't be encryption in the first place.

Seriously, you're just making yourself look silly with statements like that. Stop guessing and speculating and actually study the subject for even a half hour so you can do something other than embarrass yourself.

[stuart68]

212. I do know a little about it

you are entitled to your opinion, I will stand by mine. you sound like the silly folks who have leaned on an apparently scientific explanation that was later disproven. Remember the story of Einstein's brain that was just some whack with no valid reason for his actions ? He has just been proven right and unlocked some incredible new science about the brain and intelligence.

You think I am uninformed and silly - got it, thanks.

[stuart68]

216. it relates to Dual_EC_DRBG

and the fact it is part of AES256 at the recommendation of the NSA....

[boppers]

279. 'how is it"?

In context:
"how is it that some of the weirdest conspiracy theories get trumpeted here, and my theory that the government has a secret key for encryption is summarily dismissed ? Maybe it is not weird enough."

The thing is that insane theory is trumped by data and experiments, sane theory is verified by data and experiments.

[Towlie]

213. That's about the most vivid example of a straw man argument that I've ever heard!

Please look up "straw man fallacy" if you don't know what the term means. I never said that the U.S. government has no secret capabilities or programs of which I'm unaware.

And as the anonymous quote goes, which Senator Harry Reid brought to light a few months ago, "You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts."

[stuart68]

214. So AES256 incorporates Dual_EC_DRBG

because of the NSA recommendation. If you have the keys (constants) for the random number generation, the encryption algorithm is pretty much shot.

So, there is probably a "key" or method that would allow the US to crack the encryption.

so, my opinions are based on facts. what are yours based on ?

[Towlie]

238. I understand what you're saying. Here's some more info to combine with what you know:

1. AES256 doesn't incorporate Dual_EC_DRBG, Dual_EC_DRBG is the government standard for random number generation. It's separate from the encryption standard, which can be implemented in several different ways. For example, Truecrypt generates random numbers for key generation by asking you to wiggle your mouse around for a few minutes. Dual_EC_DRBG and other such algorithms are only necessary in automated systems that don't have access to superior methods such as human interaction.

2. The insurance.aes256 file begins with the plaintext word "Salted". You can see this by bringing up a command window in the same directory as the file and typing "type insurance.aes256|more"

3. The presence of the word "Salted" has been identified by some knowledgeable-sounding people as a sign that the encryption was probably done with http://www.openssl.org/">OpenSSL. (Sorry, I don't have a link for that.)

4. The question remains as to whether OpenSSL uses Dual_EC_DRBG random number generation. I'm inclined to doubt that it does but you're welcome to research the issue if you like.

5. If the government does have the "back door key" for Dual_EC_DRBG, and if Julian Assange used an encryption program that incorporates that method of random number generation, then it's very possible that he did it deliberately. After all, there's presumably nothing in the file that the government doesn't already know, and if they crack the file it might only prove to them that Julian Assange isn't bluffing. In any event, if they take any action that suggests that they did crack the file, they might expose themselves to the Dual_EC_DRBG scandal that http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/11/the_strange_sto.html">Bruce Schneier described.

This is really getting interesting, isn't it?

[boppers]

269. OpenSSL FAQ:

http://www.openssl.org/support/faq.html#USER1

They pretty much use /dev/random and /dev/urandom

[joshcryer]

276. Every good AES implementation attempts to get random data from the device it runs on.

A PRNG should only be used in the event purely random data is not available. It is highly unlikely that the file in question is using a PRNG for its secret key.

[boppers]

277. There's a deeper issue at play

If the NSA or CIA issued a proposed standard for "Alphabet Blocks", that is, wooden carved blocks used by children, there are some folks who would declare that it "must be" a big brother conspiracy. If the government is involved, it must be evil.

...To which I generally offer them a one-world-government standardized cup of tea:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3103

[boppers]

282. But hey, *any* doubt is assumed to be crackable!

This is why arguments cannot be settled by message boards.

[joshcryer]

275. HAHAHA, no credible AES implemention uses a PRNG.

What a joke.

[democrat2thecore]

185. W H A T ???????? "US only allows encryption algorithms that have a back door" That is WRONG -nt

[stuart68]

215. the algorithm in question

has components due specifically to NSA recommendation. these components are related to the generation of random numbers, which is at the heart of any encryption algorithm.

So maybe the US does not require it, but the end result is in fact the same.

[democrat2thecore]

225. But he could have used any of the other algorithms

He chose AES because Rijndael is, in fact, the best there is. The NSA had nothing to do with the selection of the AES - it was a NIST project and a fully transparent process. It's so good, the NSA itself uses the algorithm.

[stuart68]

231. yes, but the NIST used core pieces recommended by NSA

it comes down to the fact that encryption starts with a random number, and a random number is created by some program, and if you know the seed numbers, you can crack the encryption. NSA planted the seeds with pushing for the incorporation of Dual_EC_DRBG for random number generation.

So, yes, NIST selected this algortihm and NSA uses it, but NIST adopted the NSA recommendation for random number generation, the key to the encryption.

[joshcryer]

245. The Rijndael S-box (initial seed hash, if you will), is designed to be resistant to attack.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rijndael_S-box

It does not use precomputed random seed values, indeed, it is quite not-random.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

218. You fail Math forever. -nt

[stuart68]

219. educate yourself as to the NSAs input...

[Posteritatis]

229. Educate yourself as to how cryptography works

They could have designed the entire algorithm from the ground up and told everyone how it works, and they'd still need to know the specific key under which it was encoded to decode anything. If the NSA lost a key for a file they themselves encrypted, they would not be able to break it in any reasonable amount of time. Every single step of the encryption process is wide-open publicly available, and that does not make it the slightest bit easier to crack, even for the NSA you seem to believe has godlike powers over time and space.

You're not quite claiming that someone who thought of one-time pads could break any one-time-pad encryption out there, but it's within an order of magnitude of that level of ignorance. The only ways this can be broken are by having physical access to the machine while it's being initially encoded, having the key itself, or by years and decades and more of brute-force attacks.

[stuart68]

230. I have

random numbers are the startign point for cryptography, and the NSA pushed for inclusion of Dual_EC_DRBG for AES256. It was determined that there are constants and seret numbers for Dual_EC_DRBG, and havign these will allow you to crak the encryption. We don't know if NSA has these, but we don't know they do not. Odd they would push for Dual_EC_DRBG when it is so slow compared to other protocols for random number generation.

These things are not magical, they all strt with some random number and the random number is created by some set of code created with some secret numbers and constants. Someone has those or had them at some point.

[anigbrowl]

253. no, you haven't

Because if you had you would realize that nothing compels use of dual _ec_dbrg. Don't trust it? Use something else for your random number source.

[Deadgnome]

62. This guy

Will very well not be alive for much longer at this rate, which is both unsettling, and unfortunate. At least he will go down as being fairly effective in pissing off the big guys on the block. This is one giant fist/middle finger in the air against America and I hope he gets out as much as he possibly can before he's gone. This country is a waste of shit, there are diamonds in the rough in this country, many inhabit this very web domain, but overall, I fear we are losing ground quickly.

Sorry for the anger this morning, but I can't hold my tongue anymore, especially when I watch the crap our Pentagon, this administration, etc. are spewing to spin this.

[democrat2thecore]

184. I agree he's probably the safest man in the world right now

Any strange death would point right to Washington.

[dadzilla]

64. Perhaps the only person in the world safe frpm the CIA

I bet they keep a detail watching out -->for<-- his safety.

[pleah]

70. Keep leaking the secrets!

K&R

[snot]

75. Assange looks like he could use some Z's.

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Posteritatis]

90. Pretty sure this is the torch passing. (nt)

[1American]

92. WikiLeak

This man is clearly an enemy of America. Why else would he do
whatever he can to undermine all of us? And, how is he able to
hack into so-call safe websites? How much has he stolen from
banks or individuals? How much is he selling to Al Qaeda,
China, Russia, and other groups or countries, and what is his
purpose? My life and my family's life may be in danger from
this CRIMINAL! 

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

93. Julian Assange Stole My Visa Card & Used It To Buy Online Porn, Honey, I swear!

:eyes: I think you're safe, genius.

[boppers]

102. He's an admitted ex-hacker.

The best security folks usually are, you can't learn to be a good locksmith without learning how locks work.

[arikara]

118. nt just...

:rofl:

[gaspee]

123. You're funny!

You made me LOL!

[Vickers]

124. You're so cute! n/t

[Towlie]

125. Please supply attributions with your Fox News quotes.

[drm604]

133. I'm not aware of him hacking into any websites.

You must know something the rest of us don't. What's your source for that claim?

[Ohio Joe]

108. Pretty meaningless

Until he releases the key, I'm not sure why this is news.

[davidwparker]

113. Good for him. Bravo.

[populistdriven]

120. support him by running tor relay, it takes all of 1 minute to setup

www.torproject.org/docs/tor-doc-relay.html.en

[AlabamaLibrul]

201. As someone who is just a layman when it comes to networking,

I have been led to believe that since tor relays go through your computer network, all traffic would point to you, and it's possible you could get popped for someone accessing illegal material through your relay. (FWIW, I have used tor a few times for transmitting sensitive but not illegal material)

Is this a realistic concern?

[Rex]

127. I can't blame the MIC for wanting to 'shut him up'. Bodyparts are bad PR

and could cause a lot of heartache in the recruitment machine, the profit machine and the war machine. That is why they pay trillions to keep slaughter of innocents...haha who am I kidding! Everyone knows the Pentagon slaps on a 'under investigation' sticker on each slaughter site and moves on. They've been doing it for years...nothing new here, just new footage of how bad it really is.

MIC = 0
Ass = 1

[faceit]

140. Truth has a way of always coming out....

The system is built on lies.

To destroy the system...expose the lies

This is the most hopeful and incredible thing that has happened in a very long time.

Real change takes a perception change.

Woah...what a mind fuck this guy has pulled on the powers that be.

Exquisite.

[Pavulon]

171. That assumes people care.

what can he dump that will be mind blowing. cia executes prisoner, 7 day cycle. Short of bush eating iraqi kids there is nothing he can dump that will change policy. He could compromise security systems, but looks like they fucked that up already.

So they would get a few hundred million to fix them.

He is covering his ass, or trying to.

[Pavulon]

144. AES 256 would take the NSA how long to walk through.

like you would solve the cross word puzzle, you know one for little children.

[Posteritatis]

164. It's what big chunks of the US military *uses*

So my guess is it's pretty secure. Then again I've encountered the concept before reading this article, which some people commenting in this thread clearly haven't.

[Pavulon]

167. That assumes they dont have his machine before he encrypted it..

why go to all that trouble to peel an orange if you can poke a straw in and grab what you want. This guy is not going to win against an agency with billions of dollars and decades of designing and breaking crypto.

interesting story thought.

[Turborama]

169. I don't think it matters whether the NSA can open it or not

In fact, it might even help him if they can. The point is that it has been released to the public and the public can't open it until someone tells them how to.

I'm not getting into the rights and wrongs of the Afghanistan leaks here, btw. Just observations of this story in particular.

[Pavulon]

170. It assumes the public cares.

short of george bush eating iraqi children there is nothing they can release that will alter the policy. Only lead to more or less death.

cia executes a prisoner, 7 day blab, then who cares. there is a teeny tiny slice of stuff that could actually change policy and he does not have it.

He is covering his ass, because he jumped in way over his head.

[Turborama]

177. I'm not speculating about what's in it and the impact it may have

I'm just talking about his possible motives and whether or not it matters if the NSA can open the file.

[BrightKnight]

178. .

[boppers]

181. Your math is wrong.

Solving AES is like solving a crossword puzzle, 256 ways, to guess *one* possible letter. For the next letter, you have to figure out 256X256 crossword puzzles, which is 66,536 crossword puzzles... and so on.

This is a gigabyte "crossword" puzzle, and for every single one of the 1,000,000,000 bytes, the complexity increases by 256 more puzzles to solve.

That's 256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256X256 (etc.)

A BILLION times.

[Pavulon]

235. Yep, assumes they have not already solved it

as it is off the shelf crypto and it assumes they did not have the file before he passed it through a crytpo algorithm.

That is what the NSA has been doing for decades.

[Q3JR4]

150. Good on you Mr. Assange.

Governments that use secrecy to avoid public scrutiny for their unconscionable actions deserve everything they get.

I see the work of Wikileaks as a push back against those in the military industrial complex who would love to see their activities silenced from the public consciousness.

Q3JR4.

[PatrynXX]

159. Nothing like reading comments about the "founder"

Should be tried for treason against his country. Yeah thats kinda hard nitwits. 1. he's not an American 2. he's from the same country as the owner of Faux. 3. being how Australia has been this year (kicking out Abby Winter's website) and turning into a really bad ass right wing country, I'd almost think he'd be more worried about Australia. If it leaked any Australian info..

What I don't get is the media covers out target area's and reveals where the troops are everyday. How's the wikileaks any different? Sometimes I'm surprised in this country when illegal immigrants actually reveal their face to the camera. Like your chances of being caught just increased...

I'm more irritated at the soldier who broke the rules and leaked the info that wikileaks. They just did what any real (not normal) journalist would do. Release it. Redacted of course.

[pmorlan1]

166. Great Post

I hope someone leaks the "destroyed" torture tapes to wikileaks (similar to the plot in the new Barry Eisler book Inside Out). Hmmmmm...maybe the government thinks that they already did and that's why they're so freaked out. The government wants to read all of our secrets but they go crazy when their secrets are revealed.

If you haven't read the Eisler book...here is a link

http://www.barryeisler.com/

"Inside Out achieves what only the best works of fiction can: it imparts profoundly insightful commentary on the most pressing political controversies of the day within a riveting dramatic plot. Eisler's unique talent is weaving together exciting story-telling with provocative headline-based truths, and he reaches all new heights with his latest novel."
—Glenn Greenwald, Salon, author of Great American Hypocrites: Toppling the Big Myths of Republican Politics

"Inside Out takes us on a tour of the darkest crevices of the new National Security State. It's a brilliant work of fiction—but is it really so fictional? Eisler's plot lines move dangerously close to real life; they are animated by a reality behind the headlines."
—Scott Horton, Contributing Editor, Harper's Magazine

"Inside Out is a modern Heart of Darkness, with Special Ops veteran Ben Treven taking a rip-roaring ride through jungle shoot-outs and up a sinister Potomoc into a world of assassination and torture, made more frightening because it's all too real. The book combines exciting entertainment with an almost encyclopedic summary of the torture scandal of the past decade, including a sly nod to the growing impact of the blogosphere. If you want to know where policies of war, torture, and assassination have taken this country, read this book."
—Jeffrey Kaye, Invictus

[Pavulon]

168. If they do, what do you think will happen? 7 day cycle, move on.

short of a gangbang with the former administration and a 7 year old there is nothing they can release that will do anything but piss off the arab street. Some guy getting killed on tape, saw that yesterday by Jamaican police, not going to change policy.

This whole concept assumes people will actually give a shit, not just show faux concern.

Thats horrible martha, pass the salt.

[earth mom]

172. K & R for truth!

:kick:

[flamingdem]

173. Interview with Julian Assange on Democracy Now

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/28/wikileaks_founder_julian_assange_transparent_government

[Downwinder]

176. Anybody ever heard of a Trojan horse?

[BrightKnight]

179. Trying to blackmail the CIA doesn't sound like a good plan.

It is difficult to believe that someone acting alone would try something like that.

[Downwinder]

182. The Harry Golden Rule:

"in present-day America it's very difficult, when commenting on events of the day, to invent something so bizarre that it might not actually come to pass while your piece is still on the presses."

[flyarm]

180. Why did we go to war in Afghan? Because 3000 people were murdered supposedly by AL Que ada

there are less than 100 Al Que ada in Afghan today, according to our own government reports.

We did not go to war against the Taliban but it has now morphed into that.

If our enemy has been all but eradicated there, Why are we still there and why has Obama increased our troops and mercenaries there?

This was and is a bogus war for war profiteers.

This is a war for our government to make sure war profiteers get $$$$$$$$$$$

When Bush was in the White House Rummy admitted 2 trillion $$ were missing, Now it is 800+ billion

Does anyone believe none of that money has ended up back here in Some people running for office's coffers?

What bettter way to funnel money?

On aprrox 2001 May 22,2001 ..Bush and Cheney gave 43 million( of your tax dollars) to the Taliban..in direct opposition/violation to What instructions the Clinton Admin had forwarded to the Bush admin..The Taliban was told , turn over Bin Laden or no money..Bush and Cheney defied that.

The Taliban is now the boogey man.And yet to this day, your tax dollars are going to the Taliban..while they still kill our soldiers.

And there are people pissed off at Julian??????

WTF is wrong with people here..this is not the DU or DU'ers I used to think I knew.

Julian has killed no one, and it is supposition that anyone will or could die with the documents released..but I sure as fuck know my government has killed many many many many innocent people..both in Afghan and Iraq.

Did you know for instance, when Bush started his war of lies in Iraq, more than 50% of the population In Iraq was under the age of 15..most Iraqi citizens were highly educated..and yet still today many have problems getting electricity..and clear water to drink.

In Sept 2001 my co-workers were killed on 9/11 , did you know many many of the familys were totally against either of these wars?

I thank Julian,for bringing truth into the air.. because nothing will ever bring my co-workers back..nor my neighbors kids who were killed on 9/11..and the future terrorists of the world and who will be aiming at Us ..we have now Created! All I can say is, God help our kids and their future.We have now created a sleeping tiger..and one who will be justified in their anger and wanting revenge for what we have done to them!

Do not think for a moment that other countries and those we attacked viciously and have treated like animals or worse don't know what we have done..they damn well know what we have done..it is only dumb fucked Americans that do not know!

Maybe because someone had the Guts Like Julian, we can stop these wars with the exposure of truth..if and when Americans do find out the truth and hopefully somehow and some way we can right the wrong we have done.

I thank you Julian.sincerely!

33 yr flight crew of one of the Airlines involved on 9/11 ..NY Based ..now retired.

fly

[superconnected]

249. +10000

[Cronus Protagonist]

186. THE INSURANCE HAS JUST NOW BEEN FULLY DECODED!!

Here's a direct quote:

http://tinyurl.com/4knsn

[Kablooie]

189. Of course! Even a caveman could do it.

[Cronus Protagonist]

233. Thank you for getting it

Some people on here can't add two and two together! lol

:P

[Turborama]

193. SPAM WARNING, link in post 186 above takes you to Geico's website

It's spam.

[high density]

198. It's a joke?

Wow.

[Cronus Protagonist]

232. Lighten up a ilittle

Oh, and look up the definition of spam while you're at it.

:P

[shanti]

190. why didn't this happen when bush was in office?

:shrug:

[24601]

203. I remember plenty of leaks in the 2001-2009 period. Just a few

of the bigger leaks include:

- Terrorist Surveillance Program (2005)
- CIA renditions/air transport program (2006)
- CIA "secret" prisons (2006)
- Valerie Plame (2003)
- Abu Ghraib (2004)
- Pat Tillman FF Investigation Leak (2007)
- Sens. Durbin/Rockefeller/Wyden Spy Satellite Leak Probe (2004)
- Sen. Shelby Intercepts Leak Probe (2004)

etc, etc, etc. The leak list goes on and on and on. I'll overlook that you inferred otherwise because of partisan-colored glasses and suggest instead that perhaps you just didn't realize that they were based on "leaked" information.

Just google any controversial subject and whenever you read that the source's name was withheld because he/she was not authorized to speak to the press - that's news-speak for leaked into.

[Posteritatis]

207. Also, this guy might have simply not had this stuff yet. (nt)

[Rosa Luxemburg]

196. Would they please leak Cheney's energy meetings

[derby378]

209. Uh, guys?

The "insurance" file on Wikileaks has just been replaced with a smaller 214MB version. What's the scoop?

[chatnoir]

228. I still see the 1.4GB file up on the site...

:shrug: