Word of the Day: undecimal - in eleven parts
|
|
|
Wikileaks is imploding
THE MYSTERIOUS WHISTLEBLOWER NETWORK Wikileaks is apparently imploding over the autocratic rule of its founder and front man, Julian Assange.
It does not seem that the organisation is worried about the sex allegations that were made about him last month in Sweden, but more that he unilaterally handed documents to friends in the media on an October embargo.
According to Wired, key members of Wikileaks were incandescent with rage when they discovered Assange had secretly provided media outlets with embargoed access to a vast database of information on the Iraq war.
Wikileaks is set to release the trove of Iraq data on 18 October, which ex-staffers feel is far too early. They want to make sure that the names of US collaborators and informants in Iraq are properly removed to make sure they are not killed.
However in chat transcripts Assenge said that he was the heart and soul of this organization, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organiser, financier and all the rest. "If you have a problem with me, piss off," he reportedly said.
Now it seems that people are doing just that.
Herbert Snorrason, an Icelandic university student who until recently helped manage WikiLeaks' secure chat room, said that the release date which was established was completely unrealistic.
He warned if the next batch did not receive full attention, he would not be willing to cooperate.
At least six Wikileaks staffers have apparently quit in recent weeks, including Daniel Domscheit-Berg, who was WikiLeaks' German spokesman.
Domscheit-Berg cleaned out his desk because when he asked Assange about his cosy deals with the media, the Wikileaks founder accused him of leaking information about discontent within Wikileaks to a Newsweek columnist and the conversation apparently deteriorated from there.
Domscheit-Berg told Assange to stop trying to be a king or god. He told him that he was behaving like an emperor or slave trader.
Assange suspended him for a month for that quip. Domscheit-Berg quit.
The editing of the most recent batch of 15,000 documents was completed weeks ago, according to some former Wikileaks staffers, but Assange has held off on publishing those reports for reasons he has not shared within the group. µ
Share this:
Share
For those that like some facts rather than the 'prepared statements':
He was asked in an interview about the allegations that people say he's an attention-whore and such, and he said that they found the public wanted a face to go with the website but that the other members are not exactly jumping in their seat to get known, so he took the task of being the face of wikileaks because somebody has to do it and he's suited for the job.
And yeah I would not want to have the entire 'patriotic' establishment on my ass and people that kill and torture others for a fun and a living to know me by name and face.
Both the supporters and non-supporters fear he might be either murdered or put in jail for life on some bogus charge (or without any charge in case of the US).
So I believe him if he says not many stepped forward.
As for people complaining he acts like god: well he has more claim on it that the freaking pentagon or CIA or US president or prime minister, or the UN creeps, and they act like that all the time and actually torture and kill and imprison people for life with that as basis, hundreds of thousand of people.
To any supporter of what Wikileaks stands for, Assange and the people behind it are irrelevant. All that matters is that the information which those in power try to suppress reaches the general public. From that point of view, it makes very little difference who is in charge of Wikileaks. That person is just the middleman.
Provided the documents they have go from being secret to being widely known, the organization itself is irrelevant. Therefore I don't see why any supporters will really care what happens with internal feuds provided those feuds don't halt the publication of the documents they have: including the Garani massacre video, the massive cache of diplomatic cables containing policies the government don't want us to know about, and the Iraq war docs.
If these documents are published, what does it matter WHO published them? What does it matter if it's Assange or someone else, as long as the job gets done?
It's a lot of fun when you have all the little hands taking care of the menial everyday tasks. It's a lot less fun when you have to take out your own trash.
Looks like Mr. I-Am-God Assange is going to have to learn to take out his own trash in the near future.
Serves him right.
Bullshit story is bullshit.
And incidentally, How long does it take the US to get to someone if they wish to kill him/her in iraq or afghanistan? 12 minutes tops? And how long does it take them to protect their sources? I seems that it then takes them about twice as long as it took sir livingstone to travel to and discover the nile and travel back to report on it, back in 1867.
I'm a bit disappointed that the inq now lets themselves be used in the campaign of desperation the pentagon is waging against wikileaks, with something as old and predictable and dumb as spreading stories about the representative, I mean do we really have to be fooled by that these days? Get a grip already.
I can understand the US republican public is fooled, they can't help it the poor sods, but anybody with half a brain and/or some decent education should not debase themselves by being fooled.
Bigger you nailed it with "the only value left is to discredit / discourage future leaks."
What would happen if governments were upfront about everything they did? I think we might elect a new government, and thats what the crooks afraid of.
Assange is most likely some sort of agent for an intelligence agency. That can't be nailed down because lost in a muddle of contradictions:
1) Mysterious funding of Wikileaks (said to be $1M). Still unaccounted.
2) Whatever the source, Assange draws on money for extensive travel.
3) Assange suppposedly hunted, yet numerous public appearances.
4) Access for media outlets in advance of public release. A huge red flag as allows "official" reaction to be prepared.
5) The celebrity of Assange and media attention is suspicious in itself.
6) Supposedly the goal is to expose The Truth and save innocent lives. Yet that's secondary to protecting "US collaborators and informants" (by definition traitors), right in line with an intelligence agency's priorities.
7) The last document dump, as I noted here, mostly argues for moving the perpetual war to Pakistan / Iran rather than ending it.
8) If an intelligence op, then they've variously mis-played it, and perhaps the only value left is to discredit / discourage future leaks.
Domsheit? Dumb-shit? c'mon.. you can't make that stuff up! :)
Why is it that the first thing a raving anti-establishment "freedom fighter" does when he gets a bit of power is set up his own little dictatorship.