Hanlon's Razor
Julian Assange's internet link has been intentionally severed by a state party...
Never assign to malice what can be easily explained by incompetence
'State cuts' Assange internet
WikiLeaks claims its boss Julian Assange had his internet access cut off by an unnamed "state party" at his bolthole in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Julian Assange's internet link has been intentionally severed by a state party. We have activated the appropriate contingency plans. — WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) October 17, 2016 …
-
-
Monday 17th October 2016 20:20 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Hanlon's Razor
Never assign to malice what can be easily explained by incompetence
Shhh, it's Assange. He has never assigned anything to an innocent mistake if it could be made into a conspiracy about him that could get him headlines.
As for the actual disconnect, it turns out it was the embassy himself. I guess it's a hint for him to finally start packing, electricity will be next...
-
-
-
Monday 17th October 2016 22:54 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: intentionally severed by a state party
I would disagree. Or rather, I would agree that he rode on it, but he did pull out the dirty linen of the US into the open and made the "general public" aware of the issue, so I would say he did, significantly, advance the issue of online privacy as well as the duplicity of our "advanced" democracy. Arguably, if it hadn't been him, it would have been somebody else, but hey, it was him (ok, and his now-unfamous project partners). Also arguably, whether the dirty laundry is out or hidden, matters not (how much wider invasion of privacy do we have now v. when wikileaks surfaced?), but at least he did his bit and you can't blame him for the fact that the bulk of humans, don't give a flying monkey's f... about their privacy or what their government do, as long as it doesn't directly hurt them.
And yes, he "rode" on the wave, but I wouldn't assuem it was all his master plan, i.e. he saw this issue of privacy and secrecy as a business opportunity for himself, so he spinned it to peddle his own persona. If he did ride it, it was, I would hope, because from a Mr Nobody he suddenly became The Guru, the Champion of a Just Cause and that leval of fame can be quite... overwhelming and spins one's sense of self-importance to an overdrive. I really do feel rather sorry for the guy, to get to the point now when he's nothing more than a source of derision.
-
-
Tuesday 18th October 2016 12:20 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: intentionally severed by a state party
the just cause that you used to advance!
I am less and less convinced there ever was a just cause to begin with, Wikileaks seems more and more a later idea, a diversion to legitimise Assange's earlier illegal hacking. Wikileaks has now been directed by Assange to interfere with an election, and I suspect Ecuador is not amused by being made a playball in US and Russian politics by having their Internet connection used for it as it makes it in their name.
That sort of politics is reserved for elected officials and diplomats, not a fugitive criminal abusing the asylum system.
-
-
-
-
Tuesday 18th October 2016 14:25 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: 1984
In fact, it has become evident that the press is a partner in hiding government malfeasance and any information detrimental to Ms Clinton's campaign.
At least the press is subject to liability for any misreporting and compel corrective action. WikiLeaks, or at least Assange, is known to have a lot of money problems so it is possible that their collaboration has been bought - they seem to offer a very one-sided picture. For balance they should have been able to get hold of Trump's missing tax filings, but that seems somehow harder than getting data from top secret US agencies like the NSA.
That said, I suspect the shutdown of his Internet access is a possible hint that Ecuador prefers to do its diplomacy via people that have actually been elected - supporting Assange & co in their efforts to influence an election may have political ramifications that Ecuador would like to stay well away from.
-
-
Tuesday 18th October 2016 01:16 GMT jaysan
US Pressure on Ecuador?
Never mind how heroic or unheroic Assange is - if NYT has the right to publish illegally-obtained tax records on Donald Trump, then Assange/Wikileaks have the right to publish hacked email records from the Clinton campaign.
Since Ecuador isn't really a stakeholder in the US elections, I'm wondering why they'd suddenly decide to cut off Assange's internet now, when they haven't done it all this time? Could it be that as US Election Day draws near, that Obama's Whitehouse and/or Kerry's State Department have decided to pressure Ecuador to silence Assange? OctoberSuperSurprise?
If the US govt has pushed the govt of Ecuador to silence Assange, then the US govt has an obligation to disclose this fact to the American people, especially since such action would have an impact on the US elections. Selective intervention by the US govt in relation to the US electoral process could taint that electoral process.
-
Tuesday 18th October 2016 14:30 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: US Pressure on Ecuador?
The NYT is a recognised press agency that will stand its legal ground when challenged, which has a direct stake in the outcome on account of being actually a US entity and which is accountable for all it does.
WikiLeaks is just another group of activists whose agenda changes with the weather and funding, whose main function is to legitimise Assange's earlier hacking into something that looks like it was done for benign purposes and who resorts to threats when held accountable for consequences.
The two are not quite comparable.
-
Tuesday 25th October 2016 20:14 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: US Pressure on Ecuador?
The word is that diplomatic pressure was applied on Ecuador by the US State Dept.
http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/301393-wikileaks-ecuador-cut-off-julian-assanges-internet
Rest assured it was no accident. JA is making the Clinton campaign very uncomfortable.
-
Biting the hand that feeds IT
