I'm guessing some people have been following them lately. I think the best English-language coverage has been here because the Times was one of the media outlets that had prior access:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/worl ... crets.html

I like the idea of Wikileaks, but not everything in this release of documents seems to have a solid "whistleblower" quality to it. On one hand, stuff like the information verifying the US' kidnapping of a German citizen due to mistaken identity is good. On the other hand, is the fact that Muammar al-Qadhafi is probably getting it on with his voluptuous Ukrainian nurse?

Julian Assange's associations are sort of strange, too. Dave Emory is an "anti-fascist researcher" and pretty nutty most of the time, but he's highlighted some connections between Assange and an Australian cult he was on the run from as a child, as well as his (and the Pirate Bay's) connections to someone he alleges is a prominent Neo-Nazi:

http://spitfirelist.com/for-the-record/ ... he-damned/

http://spitfirelist.com/for-the-record/ ... g-larsson/

Emory sometimes goes overboard whenever there's even a tenuous connection between the old Third Reich and something in the present day, but I think these are a pretty interesting read, on par with some of these leaked cables.

It's probably no surprise to anyone that I fall hard on the supporters side of Wikileaks
I'll put forward the Guardian as a decent and direct source over the NYT.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/the-us-embassy-cables
They have a pretty map you can click on.

There's nothing wrong with being on the run from a crazy cult.
Assange's associations will always be a bit odd, but then, he is, however him being odd has very little to do with the documents that are being released.

This is pretty damn funny -
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/unmanned-wikileaks-drone-destroys-afghan-village-201011293295/
And puts things into some perspective.

more analysis:


http://www.salon.com/news/wikileaks/ind ... /wikileaks

The Editor of the Guardian has said that much worse is to come.

Yep I gather much worse for US diplomats, UK diplomats conspiring with them and also a major US bank and its internal workings.

I've been listening to Dave Emory's shows since the early '80s and I've gotta say, if anything, he's become far less nutty and much more authoritative in his research over the years. He does have an odd personality and his use of language is almost comically awkward at times (he overuses the word "milieu" while struggling to pronounce it) but again, the quality of his research is remarkable. He made those connections about Assange and the cult and international intelligence several weeks ago. They certainly aren't being reported to that extent anywhere else. It's interesting how people tend to dismiss such work as "conspiracy theory" without even taking a look at the evidence. Emory is the first to delineate the lines between what is documented fact and what is his own speculation, unlike almost alll "conspiracy theorists" (e.g. Alex Jones) whose egos get in the way of their critical faculties.

I've been listening to Emory for at least 15 years on WFMU and he certainly has gotten a little more "grounded" over the years. And yes, I love it when he says "milieu" too.

A while back I was recording some audio for computer-based training materials and was listening to the playback, it was strange, who was I trying to sound like? It was Dave Emory!

Hahaha. Several years back someone from the Church of the Subgenius did a great mash-up of a lot of his more rant-like moments. At one point in the recording about fifty different utterings of the word "milieu" were spliced together, followed by Dave saying "I don't know why I say 'milieu' so much!" I wish I'd saved it.

For me one of the most interesting points of his podcasts on Assange was the interviews with John Young (ex-Wikileaks co-founder and pilot of the Cryptome site.) Young published internal Wikileaks communications in which Assange described Wikileaks' founders as being international high tech venture capitalists and dissidents. He disparaged the monetization of Wikileaks on the "money changes everything" principle, which makes perfect sense as a criticism.

Although it may be another two weeks before the current cable dump is complete, thus far, the cables revealed don't seem all that spectacularly surprising. The devil is more in the details than the larger scope of revelation. Everyone already knows that the USA has cut deals with shady two-faced types in Afghanistan, that Berlusconi is a ribald drunkard, that the Obama administration has had a hard time finding new homes for the Guantanamo detainees, etc. etc. Who knows, maybe they'll blow a major lid off, but thus far, it's been more mundane than expected.

That's what I've been thinking, for the most part the cables have been pretty tame. A lot of political figures have probably facebooked and tweeted worse. But as soon as I say this, I'm sure a cable about something like the USA using radio waves to Make Kim Jung il sick will be posted.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/nov/30/interpol-wanted-notice-julian-assange

It's getting hot...

There's an interesting Salon piece asking some fairly relevant questions pertaining to all this, though a few of them can easily be discarded, such as why are Wikileaks leaking only US stuff, presumably it's because they have so much of it and why not tackle the biggest beast you can find?

One country, Ecuador, is offering asylum to Assange right now. Wonder if he'll take it or if Wikileaks also has upcoming dirt on them, too. ;p

Some interesting discussion on the subject going on at Slashdot:

http://news.slashdot.org/tag/wikileaks

Major banking scandal info coming soon?

Yeah that's the word.

it's pretty disgusting the way the powers at be are freaking out about the leaks. a lot of the information deserves the exposure, and interpol and the us gov look all the more guilty cracking down on their own people.

Apparently Wikileaks came into possession of a large number of high level Bank of America internal communications several weeks ago. Yowsa.

As for the reactions and overreactions, it's interesting that Interpol is using the abruptly dropped (then mysteriously reinstated?) charges against Assange in Sweden to indict him and make international travel more difficult. Whatever the truth, the powers that be are slapping back with a heavy hand.

I enjoyed this analysis of the smear tactics: http://nicholasmead.com/2010/08/21/how- ... mment-1566

Interpol isn't after Assange for Wikileaks, they're trying to get him back to Sweden to answer for sexual assault charges that were filed against him back in August. Based on what I've read about the case (including the stop-again, start-again nature of it) it sounds like there might be some merit to it and I think Assange should have answered the accusations.

And it was inevitable that the US government would crack down on whoever is responsible (AFAIK it's not known whether or not Bradley Manning who leaked the previous material to Wikileaks also leaked these cables). They look pretty stupid right now because of the volume of material that got out.

Personally I'm a little concerned about them cracking down in this way:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/11/30/m ... index.html

Just curious, what makes you think the charges might have merit? I'm the first to admit that piecing reportage together on this is very confusing, but at the moment, here's my understanding of some of the basic circumstances which inform my skepticism:

- Both Assange and the two ladies agree that they had consensual sex (but at different times.) The crucial point is that the women allegedly said that it got too rough for them at some point, and that this aspect was not consensual, hence the nature of the "rape/molestation" charge per Swedish law.

- Originally unbeknownst to Assange at the time of the encounters, the two women are good friends. Hmm.

- Neither woman was willing to testify on official record that they'd been raped. Allegedly one said that they were too afraid, and that they'd only gone to the police "for advice."

- Swedish authorities dropped the case about nine days ago, the chief prosecutor publicly stating that there was no basis for the rape charge.

- Suddenly, after the current big leak dump, Interpol of all agencies says that they want Assange for prosecution in Sweden ... on dropped charges?

From my perspective the whole thing stinks to high heaven. But again, who knows? This is information war on a new scale, and internationally-coordinated disinformation is going to be an ongoing tactic.

The fact that one of the women was someone he knew (a political organizer who was handling an event for him) instead of a complete stranger sort of set off my radar. I've read that the majority of rapes take place between people who know one another.

Also, there's a lot of stigma attached to sexual crimes, it's not uncommon for victims to have second thoughts about following through all the way to prosecution. I don't know much about how Sweden's legal system differs from ours which also may have affected this.

So it's really not much more than a gut feeling that there might be something there. Assange should turn himself in and try and take some comfort in the fact that the world is watching. The fact that he's a high-profile person shouldn't put him above the law.

The more he avoids the situation, the guiltier he looks, and it the more it draws attention away from the leaks. Also, Wikileaks isn't a one person operation, it should be set up so that it doesn't have to rely on one person to continue operating.

I agree almost completely with your post Roger except for the fact that because he is such a high-profile person all these people will be (and are) out to get him. And this to me adds to the shadiness of the charges against him. But yes, still he could be a rapist and also it could help his image to turn himself in.

I think the timing of it all makes it stink. That and, without being flippant, rape is a fairly easy crime to accuse someone of to destroy public sympathy.
Beyond that, whatever his personal issues may be, it does wonders to distract us from the real issues at hand. So the smear campaign works one way or another.

I wondered what ever happened Hitler's Supermen, baby breeding project. I figured one of them landed the California Gov.'s office but surely there was more than one....


The articles seem to narrowly focus on Wiki and Assange's ethics.

Since when do we care about a Hacker's ethics?

If he rapes, kills, and eats an infant every Friday, The truth is still the truth innit?

non sequitur

I like the way you think.

Assange is a saint - a modern-day Robin Hood.
And Manning (if indeed there is such a person)
deserves a medal.
"Transparency of government" anyone?

It's a sick world we live in, where people like them can be vilified,
whilst people like Clinton & Putin hold high office.

.

Nah, not really I suppose ...
Manning is obviously a spy and a traitor who should be summarily executed,
and Assange is a pedophile who should be put away for life,
preferably after being poisoned with mercury.

If you've been readin' the cables this is too funny:

http://tinyurl.com/276cgpf

BTW if you have share in Bank of America...well you might want to think of getting out and putting it into HSBC. Just saying like given Computer World was given an entire harddrive of documentation from a former employee highlighting it's business practices etc and I gather wikileaks now has it