Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Was Julian Assange Involved With Wiretapping Iceland's Parliament?

samzenpus posted about 10 months ago | from the lets-have-a-listen dept.

Privacy 167

An anonymous reader writes "Wired reports that the chat logs between Bradley Manning and Julian Assange that were used as evidence in Manning's trial have made it onto the web, at least briefly. One of those logs contained something very interesting on page 4, which was picked up on by the News of Iceland, which reports, '"Jesus Christ. I think that we have recordings of all phone calls to and from the Icelandic parliament during the past four months". This text can be found in documents that the US military published on its website and is said to be part of the conversations between Julian Assange and Bradley Manning. According to the documents, Assange claims to have phone call recordings from Althingi, the Icelandic parliament, but this is the first time that the existence of such data is mentioned publicly. ... According to Icelandic laws, it is required to inform the person you are speaking with if the phone call is being recorded. Given that the parliament is not violating laws it is clear that Assange or his associates would have to have installed recording devices or wiretaps in the parliament.' — What makes it even more interesting is that Wired also reports in this recent story: Someone's Been Siphoning Data Through a Huge Security Hole in the Internet."

cancel ×

167 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Install wiretaps? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678269)

Eh, why do you think Assange et al need to install anything? They just got the logs from the evil-doers... I wonder who that might be?

Re:Install wiretaps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678301)

Then why didn't he send that evidence to Wikileaks? It probably would have been published.

Oh wait, somethings not right here. He runs Wikileaks.... why wouldn't he publish something like this?

Re:Install wiretaps? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 10 months ago | (#45678343)

not everything sent to wikileaks was published and if there's something wrong with wikileaks it's that. but it's been pretty widely known that they didn't publish everything(just like everything leaked by snowden hasn't been published as a dump).

maybe they should have from the get go gone with torleaks instead! or better yet freenetleaks..

Re:Install wiretaps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678539)

not everything sent to wikileaks was published and if there's something wrong with wikileaks it's that.

Not really. If they published everything that was sent to them it would be easy to censor information by drowning it out in pointless noise. One could also use them for distributing CP or whatever then.
It is better if they sort through the information and only publish the stuff that indicates corruption. If there is too much of that it is even better to just limit the publications to those that show corruption where it isn't generally known. That is, if you can show corruption in one Scandinavian nation and a dozen eastern European ones it is better to just publish the Scandinavian one since it would otherwise be lost in stuff that people already take for granted.

Re:Install wiretaps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678809)

The problem is not that they'd have to publish _everything_ (say someone just sends them wikipedia articles, one after the other), but that they didn't even publish everything relevant / choose what to publish and what not to. They have their own standards to go by regarding what is "helping the world" and what is not.
And then you realize that they've pretty much concentrated on the US and you question wether that's because they never ever got anything from other countries or wether that's what they wanted to do.

'course (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678583)

'course if everything sent to WL is printed, it's accused of being unprofessional and putting lives at danger. If they don't print everything they get, they're accused of picking on the USA. Now it appears that not printing everything means that anything else that turns up is because WL were the criminals doing it.

I wonder what the doubling up on the "WL prints everything, therefore evil" accusation will be...

Re:Install wiretaps? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678399)

Assange doesn't publish things that aren't critical of the USA, so we can conclude that it was probably someone else that did it and he didn't give a fuck.The whole organization went down the toilet when it stopped being a wiki. They should have dumped Assange when it became clear that he was an Kim Dotcom-grade attention whore and focused on the actual leaks. Then maybe they wouldn't just send gigabytes of raw leaks to bad journalists and trust that they'll be careful with the source's identity, and Manning wouldn't have had is life ruined.

That rant complete, this article is complete nonsense full of logical fallacies and leaps of faith. How did they get from "Wikileaks claims to have some logs of an event" to "Assange did it!"? I've seen better journalism in the tabloids that fill the racks in a grocery store check out line. I'll make a counter claim that God did it and a disillusioned angel sent the leak in.

Re:Install wiretaps? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678549)

Assange doesn't publish things that aren't critical of the USA, so we can conclude that it was probably someone else that did it and he didn't give a fuck.

Demonstrably false. Start at the top and work your way down: Information published by WikiLeaks [wikipedia.org]

Some information has been critical fo the US government (please differentiate between the government and the people), but there has been many instances where WikiLeaks have published information that the US government would have been happy to see the light of day (eg Nuclear accident in Iran [wikipedia.org] )

Re:Install wiretaps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678619)

Only one after 2010 (the Syria documents). Though admittedly, no one in their right mind would trust them after they've shown how incompetent and negligent they've been, so it may have been from a lack of submissions. Thank god that Snowden was unconcerned about maintaining anonymity and didn't send it to them. If he had stayed in the US and trusted Assange to keep the source quiet, then he'd be in some dingy CIA prison right now will all the news stories would be quoted as saying "documents released by Wikileaks...". That'd be great for Assange's ego; he'd love it.

The beginning of NSA's diversion campaign ? (5, Interesting)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 10 months ago | (#45678677)

Ever since the Snowden's leak started some months ago to appear I've been awaiting for NSA's counter-strike.

I believe this is it.

I have the feeling that this "news" is a set-up. It's designed to accomplish 3 missions at the same time:

This may be the start of NSA's worldwide diversion campaign, to shift the focus away from NSA to Assange.

By "leaking out" Assange's "wiretapping news" online, for just a couple of hours, followed by a sudden removal of all evidences, NSA is betting that the dog and pony show would piqued the interests of many.

The fact that the Wired magazine has that piece of "news" covered so prominently means that NSA's tactic is working very, very well.

Not only Assange has become a really "evil dude", people will no longer believe all subsequent disclosures from whistle blowers, no matter who they are.

And that plays into NSA's hand --- for people won't believe any more news from the Snowden files, no matter how damaging they are.

Re:The beginning of NSA's diversion campaign ? (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45679167)

Ever since the Snowden's leak started to appear some months ago I've been awaiting for NSA's counter-strike.

I believe this is it.

This is not the first counterstrike. Scotland Yard and GCHQ of England tried it once - They tried to link Edward Snowden to pedophiles, even Slashdot covered that story ~ http://slashdot.org/story/13/11/07/038216/edward-snowden-leaks-could-help-paedophiles-escape-police-says-uk-government ~- and that attempt failed so goddamn miserably.

But I concur, this time it's different. This salvo is very well planned and executed, and they even have their planted agent(s) inside Wired Magazine to do the heavy lifting for them. From the look of it,.the whole thing has panned out nicely for NSA and the government of the United States of America.

But this is the first salvo. More will come.

Brace yourself !

Re:Install wiretaps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45679081)

Then why didn't he send that evidence to Wikileaks? It probably would have been published. Oh wait, somethings not right here. He runs Wikileaks.... why wouldn't he publish something like this?

Uhm. Because if you blow your wad, you get raided, and the pigs shoot you with and MP5 because you were holding a spatula. That's why.

If they don't fear you, they won't respect you, and if they don't do either, they'll feel free to kill you for being inconvenient.

Re:Install wiretaps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678307)

People associated with Assange somehow.

Re:Install wiretaps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678355)

So he's on some intellegence agency's payroll and they sent him the logs of their attack on the Icelandic parliament.

Makes perfect sense.

Re:Install wiretaps? (3, Insightful)

daem0n1x (748565) | about 10 months ago | (#45678993)

But it's a lot funnier if the whole summary is already a flamebait, full of unsupported bullshit.

It saves a lot of work for the trolls here in the comments.

No (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678273)

Re:No (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678309)

Precisely. Also, consider the source:

This text can be found in documents that the US military published on its website and is said to be part of the conversations between Julian Assange and Bradley Manning.

Maybe it's just me but I'd take whatever the US military says with a metric ton of NaCl.

Re:No (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45679119)

This. Next probably: Snowden spotted clubbing baby seals...

Yes (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678325)

Question: How or why then does he say he has the logs? At the very least he apparently received them, which would mean he is involved, so Yes.

WTF? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678279)

Assange mentions wiretap records and they assume _he_ did the wiretapping?

Is it not possible, nay likely, that he _was given_ the wiretaps in the Manning data dump?

How exactly would Manning tap all lines into the parliament?

Why would he even try, given that he had friends in that parliament - couldn't they tell him what the scuttlebutt was?

Re:WTF? (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about 10 months ago | (#45678303)

Manning said he had nothing to do with the logs for the parliament in the chat logs. It was allegedly Assange making the statement. Apparently Assange was multitasking and mentioned it.

Re:WTF? (2)

bytesex (112972) | about 10 months ago | (#45678863)

I think this is why he said he would claim asylum in Iceland at first - remember that? - thinking 'I have a nice scoop for the people there on the activities of the NSA'.

Re:WTF? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 10 months ago | (#45678361)

the chat log could have had mentions of other leaks sent to them in it.

and who would wiretap iceland parliament? well depending on the day everyone from banksters to gangsters...

though, come on, they could use just any .txt file they wrote up as evidence and just label it as essential ops for national security. I mean, who's going to testify otherwise. friggin nobody, that's who.

Re:WTF? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678493)

The claim has been for a long time, that Manning is not a whistle blower, because he did not only leak the incriminating information, but an unfiltered dump. I.e. he did not read through the data himself.

Then Assange receives it, and while talking to Manning - and presumably looking at the data they are talking about - notices complete wiretapping data.

Why isn't the most obvious explanation that the data Manning sent to Assange happened to contain wiretapping data, and the source of that data (the US government, not necessarily the military, Manning was surprised to find out how much data he had access to) had been doing the wiretapping?

Would anybody be surprised today, if it turned out that e.g. the NSA has been wiretapping foreign governments?

Re:WTF? (5, Funny)

sjames (1099) | about 10 months ago | (#45678617)

Haven't you heard? He can tap any line in the world just by whistling into a payphone!

Re:WTF? (1)

TheCarp (96830) | about 10 months ago | (#45679169)

> Assange mentions wiretap records and they assume _he_ did the wiretapping?

It is their job to make that assumption; this isn't about truth, its about spin and justification of whatever they want to do to him. Truth isn't for when you are talking about your enemy.

> Is it not possible, nay likely, that he _was given_ the wiretaps in the Manning data dump?

Seems unlikely. I mean, sure it could have happened. It could be something US agents did and she managed to get his hands on, but I don't remember any reports that she was uber hacker going around breaking other systems. Takes a lot less skill to pull off an inside job.

Remember, Assange had a system setup to allow anyone to anonymously send him stuff and it was widely published. He could easily have gotten it through someone else.

> Why would he even try, given that he had friends in that parliament - couldn't they tell him what the
> scuttlebutt was?

Are we talking Manning or Assange? I wasn't aware Manning had friends there or would have any reason to care. I mean maybe I missed it but, it was out of character for the leaks, everything else was US leaks and about war crimes or international relations.

Assange on the other hand.... that seems more likely but still; he wouldn't have even had to have been the least bit involved to get the data, all that had to happen is someone who did have it (who again may not have been the original attacker) decided wikileaks should have it.

Installed by Assange? (5, Insightful)

rastos1 (601318) | about 10 months ago | (#45678281)

How does it follow that the recording devices were installed by Assange? It just says that Assange/Manning had the recordings. Not that they actually planted the bugs.

(fp?)

Re:Installed by Assange? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678317)

How does it follow that the recording devices were installed by Assange? It just says that Assange/Manning had the recordings. Not that they actually planted the bugs.

(fp?)

Correct. it seems more likely Manning gave him the files, not knowing it contained some choice records.
People be handing files to him all the time. I doubt he does any of the actual snooping.

Re:Here we go!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678405)

So much for "not going after Assange" !

Can you say frame job boys and girls?

Stuff like this with the "US military's" name being mentioned makes it blatantly clear this is PR propaganda. Or, cause I like to look at this from other angles, the idiot media/press took the actual story out of context, because people like Assange have the balls to do what the media refuses to do.

Hold on, better yet the US Military, or the US powers at be, will claim they found his "inside man" who planted the devices, ahhh the plot thickens. And there are people that buy into this stuff again because the media/press refuse to report anything.

In all fairness I absolutely dislike Assange, the guy is taking credit for things he had nothing to do with, or stole investigative stories other worked there ass off to get, and have yet to be credited for doing all the work.

Re:Installed by Assange? (4, Insightful)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 10 months ago | (#45678541)

Looks like the US hasn't given up smearing him.

Re:Installed by Assange? (5, Insightful)

Vintermann (400722) | about 10 months ago | (#45678601)

It doesn't follow at all. He wouldn't express surprise if he was trying to eavesdrop on the Icelandic parliament.

Re:Installed by Assange? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45679041)

It's a lot like this, "The NSA has data on all its citizens that was illegal to obtain. Since the NSA wouldn't break the government's own laws, it's clear the Assange placed wiretaps on every citizen in their own homes."

Assange said he likes crushing bastards (0, Troll)

cold fjord (826450) | about 10 months ago | (#45678283)

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (1)

znrt (2424692) | about 10 months ago | (#45678323)

have modpoints, couldn't find the "cheap fud" tag ... /.!

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (-1, Troll)

cold fjord (826450) | about 10 months ago | (#45678339)

So you're saying the people that know Julian don't know Julian? Sounds like more FUD to me.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (4, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | about 10 months ago | (#45678401)

The problem is the people you're linking to that "know him" are only the ones that had a falling out with him and/or are jealous of him.

The problem is there are many more out there that know him and outright praise him.

So your one-sided completely biased post doesn't exactly earn much credibility given that fact.

But you know this, because it's your usual modus operandi isn't it? It's what you do every single time such a subject comes up.

I doubt anyone has a problem with genuine critique of Assange, but seriously dude, you need to learn a bit about objectivity. Taking one-sided views of a person then claiming that's everything that person is is utterly pathetic, I might just as well claim you're a troll based on this and dismiss everything you've ever said or have got to say, but I'm more pragmatic than that, I recognise that sometimes, just sometimes, you have a point. This isn't one of those times.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (-1, Troll)

cold fjord (826450) | about 10 months ago | (#45678519)

For most of the stories about Assange and Wikileaks on Slashdot you can generally count on two things: massive praise for both, and heavy down mods for any criticism of them. It doesn't matter if they are verifiably true or personal opinions, down they go, -1. Assange effectively has his own cult of personality that will defend him no matter what. I have little doubt that will be true even if he is eventually convicted of rape.

I don't claim that what I post is, to use your phrase, "everything that person is." But there are serious issues, and serious criticisms regarding Wikileaks from serious people. They are worth considering to balance out the praise and defense that is all but guaranteed to come from others. And how many of the Assange / Wikileaks fans are going to offer any criticism at all? Precious few.

As far as I go, it seems to me you are at best the pot calling the kettle black. I don't see you really adopting a balanced criticism of me. Shall I say that is your usual modus operandi? That you are a troll?

Rest easy though, the moderators will almost certainly be gentle with you. You come to defend Julian, not to criticize him. But frankly, your criticism in this case has little credibility with me. I've seen the pattern these discussions take all too often. It is already occurring - the head of this thread is -1. No surprise, the pattern is well established. Criticize Assange at your peril.

Let us close with this piece of wisdom for Julian [theguardian.com] : " A reporter worried that Assange would risk killing Afghans who had co-operated with American forces if he put US secrets online without taking the basic precaution of removing their names. "Well, they're informants," Assange replied. "So, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it.""

You better hope you never come between him and his goal, or he'll take pleasure in crushing you.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (0)

cold fjord (826450) | about 10 months ago | (#45678591)

Well, that didn't take long. 20 minutes for the first -1. Predictable.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (1)

Xest (935314) | about 10 months ago | (#45678681)

From your other response to me:

"But frankly, your criticism in this case has little credibility with me."

Why are you now complaining about being down modded? It's not like I didn't warn you that your attempts at character assassination probably wouldn't go down well given that they're entirely one sided and too obviously agenda based.

I don't demand that you to listen to me, or anyone else, I don't demand that my points to have credibility with you, but if you are going to opt to go down that route of ignoring my point, if you are going to claim my point has no credibility with you, then you can't complain when you inevitably then get down modded. That's the option you chose, that's the path you walked, and the decision you made.

The response to your posts on issues like this is predictable, either learn to understand why you're being down modded or accept that it will happen. There are topics where I have viewpoints that aren't popular on Slashdot and similarly get downmodded, I either accept that I'll get downmodded or I just don't waste my time on those topics. It's just the way it is.

You've got three options - 1) try and be a bit more understanding as to why your posts are perceived to be extremely biased and down modded, 2) If you think you're right and Slashdot is the problem, then don't bother posting on discussions you know you'll just get downmodded, or 3) Just keep on posting on the topics you do in the way you do and keep on getting down modded.

But what you can't do is carry on as is and then whine about getting down modded, you know it's going to happen so why act surprised and like a victim when it does? You put yourself in that position, you opted for it.

At the end of the day discussion on Slashdot is largely meaningless unless you get something out of it, you're not going to change the world here but you might get some interesting discussion or encounter opposing viewpoints worth considering. If you're not going to engage in worthwhile discussion or accept anyone elses point though and are just going to spout one sided propaganda then you're wasting both your time and that of everyone else.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678741)

Well, that didn't take long. 20 minutes for the first -1. Predictable.

Yes, you are a predictable right-wing hack. Why, is self-awareness starting to struggle with your hypocrisy?

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678883)

Well, that didn't take long. 20 minutes for the first -1. Predictable.

Yes, you are a predictable Statist, Authoritarian hack. Why, is self-awareness starting to struggle with your hypocrisy?

FTFY

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678965)

Considering your bias towards inaccuracy and misleading statements/false claims, -1 is exactly where your posts should be.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (1)

ScentCone (795499) | about 10 months ago | (#45679089)

Good call. Always attack the messenger, and never comment things like the verifiable Assange quote you wish didn't exist.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (5, Informative)

FriendlyLurker (50431) | about 10 months ago | (#45678727)

A reporter worried that Assange would risk killing Afghans who had co-operated with American forces if he put US secrets online without taking the basic precaution of removing their names. "Well, they're informants," Assange replied. "So, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it."

The reporter that attributed those words to Assange is David Leigh. A well known liar [order-order.com] , the type of person that breaks contract then lies about it [twitlonger.com] , David Leigh also has been called out out by an independent third party journalist for fabricating those words [wordpress.com] :

"However, an independent witness – John Goetz, a journalist with Der Spiegel – states that the events related above are simply not true:"

"“I was at dinner at the Moro restaurant in London, along with Marcel Rosenbach from Der Spiegel, David Leigh and Declan Walsh of the Guardian, and Julian Assange of WikiLeaks. Patrick Forbes asked me specifically if Julian Assange had made the remark “They’re informants, they deserve to die” at the dinner, as has been alleged by David Leigh, and I told him that Julian did not say that at the dinner.”"

David Leigh' s systematic pattern of dishonesty [wordpress.com] .

But you know all this already, don't you Cold Fjord. By calling out your FUD with some facts and counter examples you will feebly defend as you have done in your last post by accusing any detractors from your message of being "fans" or part of some cult. Anything other than, you know, actually addressing the facts or providing solid counter evidence.

So now you have been informed that David Leighs account is highly questionably including credible independent third party witnesses, and that David Leigh has a long history of dishonesty on other non Assange related areas - yet I can guarantee you will be back here with the same ferver like agenda, the same libel Assange quote on the next Wikileaks story. No matter how many times we demonstrate some of your more crazy ideas to be false, you persist on repeating over and again the same falehoods - damn the facts and eternally ignore any counter evidence presented. One can see this clearly time and again across many topics only by browsing your post history and the subsequent replies. Rinse, repeat. This is the classical modus operandi of a troll, a shill and a astroturfer. Facts do not matter.

Ah, cold fjord again at it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678999)

C'mon, tell us. Do they pay well?

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45679245)

Let us close with this piece of wisdom for Julian: " A reporter worried that Assange would risk killing Afghans who had co-operated with American forces if he put US secrets online without taking the basic precaution of removing their names. "Well, they're informants," Assange replied. "So, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it."

Oh, Mr. Cold Fjord, my old friend, long time no talk !

I see that you are up to no good again.

How much are they paying you to lie ?

Don't you know that lying is a sin, Mr. Cold Fjord ?

No matter how much they are paying you, don't you ever think that your integrity may be worth much more ?

Do you still have _any_ integrity inside you, Mr. Cold Fjord ?

God may be very forgiving, but please, Mr. Cold Fjord, please stop testing God's patience.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (5, Insightful)

erikkemperman (252014) | about 10 months ago | (#45678349)

Look, I am pretty much convinced that Assange is a douche hors categorie. However, that observation changes precisely nothing regarding the info released via WL, such as the epic douchebaggery on the part of, say, the US diplomatic corps and military. It's not like they cancel out or something.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (0)

cold fjord (826450) | about 10 months ago | (#45678581)

Look, I am pretty much convinced that Assange is a douche hors categorie

You must not have typed that with conviction since you have a +4 as I write this. Normally Assange's fans will punish any aspersions cast on him rather quickly despite the validity.

... the epic douchebaggery on the part of, say, the US diplomatic corps and military. It's not like they cancel out or something.

That isn't necessarily true. You only have to look at the instances of either misinformation or manipulation to see that. The so called "collateral murder" video was nonsense. The same thing for the claims that Dyncorp was engaged in child prostitution. That was investigated by a State Department Inspector General, IIRC, and found to be baseless.

As far as diplomacy goes, it is in essence politics, which tends to be messy and usually takes place behind closed doors. Perhaps you are familiar with the old saying about making laws and sausages?

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (3, Insightful)

erikkemperman (252014) | about 10 months ago | (#45678643)

You must not have typed that with conviction since you have a +4 as I write this. Normally Assange's fans will punish any aspersions cast on him rather quickly despite the validity.

What moderators make of my post says nothing about my typing it with or without conviction. If I am not convinced of something I won't qualify a statement with "I am pretty much convinced". Disagree with me all you like but credit me that much, all right?

You only have to look at the instances of either misinformation or manipulation to see that.

And the US government is not known for misinformation or manipulation? If you think that then, respectfully, you have not been paying attention or else you have an unusually strong cognitive dissonance filter on.

The so called "collateral murder" video was nonsense.

I agree the material would have been stronger unedited and without commentary. That said, the fact remains that these assholes, from a safe distance in their Apache, shot a bunch of kids to shreds and attacked people who came to the scene to help. That much is not controversial. And the remarks they made to one another afterward are nothing short of disgusting.

As far as diplomacy goes, it is in essence politics, which tends to be messy and usually takes place behind closed doors. Perhaps you are familiar with the old saying about making laws and sausages?

I am familiar with the saying about sausages and making laws. Maybe I'm the odd one out in that regard, but I prefer to know what goes inside a sausage -- and if I don't like what I find I'll stop eating them. Easy fix. Same goes for lawmaking. Besides, the analogy doesn't apply here, the leaks were about international diplomacy, not lawmaking. It included some pretty lowbrow gossip, and I remain unconvinced that such banter is somehow an essential part of the game.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (0)

cold fjord (826450) | about 10 months ago | (#45678705)

That said, the fact remains that these assholes, from a safe distance in their Apache, shot a bunch of kids to shreds and attacked people who came to the scene to help. That much is not controversial. And the remarks they made to one another afterward are nothing short of disgusting.

Perhaps you didn't watch much of the video. The helicopter crews weren't assholes. The "safe distance" as a tactic is desirable, and irrelevant to the discussion. It's war, not a boxing match. The kids were in a van where they weren't visible, and why was that van there? Wasn't it violating a curfew? And why would you take your kids into a firefight? The van was trying to help insurgents escape. It was entirely proper to engage it. From what I recall the remarks were hardly disgusting, but if you lack the constitution you may want to avoid watching real combat action videos as they can be disturbing and possibly personally distressing. Not everyone is cut out for real combat, or even watching people actually being killed.

Diplomacy is a political activity like law making, and all manner of human foibles are involved. I could agree that various diplomats could be more professional.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678785)

Pretty sure the non-combatants that got shredded didn't see themselves as being in a fire fight.

Nothing more pathetic than a fucking soldier-sniffer.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678797)

Other than you?

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (5, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | about 10 months ago | (#45678711)

"The so called "collateral murder" video was nonsense."

Out of interest, what was nonsense about it? I saw the unedited version first, not even being aware that there was an edited version and it was objectively the case that the Apache pilots broke various norms of war.

They claimed they needed to fire because the targets had RPGs that could be used against them but their gun cam clearly showed that not only were they out of RPG range, but they were even further out of objective RPG range.

The van they shot with the kid in they completely and utterly failed to determine if it was even actually a threat and fired anyway.

These are not the actions of competent military personnel. The norm in such situations is do not fire until fired upon, but this took it to another level and fired before they could even be sure there was a real actual threat.

This isn't just my opinion, this is objective fact. The rules of engagement are well publicised and there's simply no argument against the fact that the Apache gunner broke them. There's absolutely no avoiding that.

It's directly equivalent to a cop just sitting alongside the road and then shooting a guy passing with a hunting rifle visible in his car before even talking to them, and then shooting another passer by that stops to try and help just in case they were both a threat. We don't allow our police to do that at home, and we shouldn't be allowing military forces to do it in a post-war occupation role. It's counter productive and the whole reason America got fucked in Iraq - because the Iraqis quickly realised they didn't want to be occupied by forces that shot them for shits and giggles - "just in case" and turned on American forces as a result.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (0, Flamebait)

cold fjord (826450) | about 10 months ago | (#45678811)

... it was objectively the case that the Apache pilots broke various norms of war.

And where did you get your information about "various norms of war"? Reading through the rest of your reply you don't seem to get much of that right.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about 10 months ago | (#45679051)

Perhaps the bulk of the problem is not the moderators, but rather, the substance of your posts. Now, Assange does have his fanboys that will engage in some degree of the behavior you describe, but they are far less persistent than the government bootlickers and/or shills.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (1, Funny)

magic maverick (2615475) | about 10 months ago | (#45678877)

Jesus Christ! I've got three months worth of phone logs from cold fjord! Here's a choice quote:
<quote>I like to stick random stuff up my ass when I ah, masturbate. Random, like err, pens, action figures, whatever.</quote>

OK, we shouldn't pick on a person for their fetishes. But what about this one!:
<quote>I think we should round up all those liberal scum and send'em to camps. Teach them the values that obviously their parents and schools failed to instill. Values like hard work, the supremacy of the state and government, and stuff.</quote>
Whoa, cold fjord sounds like a bit of a fascist doesn't he!

Other logs show cold fjord (apparently) randomly dialing numbers early in the morning (like three) and then just swearing. Quite a number of others show him calling one number repeatedly, and then hanging up before it connects. That number turns out to the number of the house he grew up in.

Our physiologists think he may have mommy issues.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678947)

Sounds like a basement-dwelling libertarian. Maybe his parents should kick his ass out into to 'free market'.

Re:Assange said he likes crushing bastards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678987)

More link spam, cold fjord? Has that ever worked for you?

Uh, problem... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678293)

"Given that the parliament is not violating laws it is clear that Assange or his associates would have to have installed recording devices or wiretaps in the parliament".

This last sentence makes no sense. You are leaving out a huge possibility. Someone else could have done this, and leaked it to WikiLeaks.

Re:Uh, problem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678857)

Quite so, I was a bit puzzled about the relationship of the two different subjects in this sentence. It sort of reminds of the nutty scientist in South Park that manages to draw the most random conclusions to come to his next act.

Re:Uh, problem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678869)

What? You're saying that someone would give secret inside information to an organisation that exists to bring secret, inside information to light? Prepostorous!

Why would he? (5, Insightful)

DMiax (915735) | about 10 months ago | (#45678295)

Why would Assange wiretap the Icelandic parliament and how could he? I doubt he has that powerful connections up there.

The obviously more likely explanation is that some spy agency (like NSA or counterparts) did it, and it has been leaked to Wikileaks. Notice how he looks surprised upon finding it out, so that Manning feels like pointing out that he wasn't the one who leaked it "*had nothing to do with that one*". So neither knew how the records were obtained in the first place.

Now one wonders: who would be able and willing of doing such a thing and who would have an interest in pinning it to Assange?

Re:Why would he? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678363)

Notice how the summary also tries to equate this with the hijacking of internet traffic through Iceland. Attempting to imply Assange was responsible for that too. Pretty obvious that the anonymous reader who submitted this has a bit of an agenda.

Re:Why would he? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678641)

'Anonymous reader' was probably cold fjord.

Re:Why would he? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678367)

Now one wonders: who would be able and willing of doing such a thing and who would have an interest in pinning it to Assange?

Anonymous would do it for shits and giggles.

hello? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678311)

to read TFS it's as if Snowden never happened. Perhaps, just maybe, someone else is tapping the world's phone lines? ya think?

and the recipient of leaks happened to, you know, end up with some of that in his inbox?

this ain't rocket science folks.

Quick. Throw more shit at him. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678315)

It's not sticking well enough!

Sounds like someone within iceland did the tapping. And sent that stuff out to wikileaks.

But that's not julian assanges fault. so.... SPIN THAT STORY!

"The evil julian tapped icelands parliament!" This fits our needs.

The founder of WikiLeaks has this info? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678321)

Well he must have installed listening equipment! There is no other possible explanation! WikiLeaks could not possibly have been leaked the info. That's absurd.

The conclusion is not clear to me (5, Insightful)

frovingslosh (582462) | about 10 months ago | (#45678331)

it is clear that Assange or his associates would have to have installed recording devices....

Hold on. They conclude that from Assange suddenly stating "Jesus Christ. I think that we have recordings of all phone calls to and from the Icelandic parliament during the past four months" ???????? How can anyone honestly conclude that? Assange seems to express surprise when he realizes what he has, surprise that he would not have if he had been wiretapping and recording. Assange was routinely getting leaked information. My conclusion would be that someone leaked this information to him, not that he had been wiretapping Iceland. And who do we know that has been spying on their friends and enemies alike, along with their own citizens? I'll give you a clue, it is someone with a 3 letter name that a whistle blower might want to expose.

Re:The conclusion is not clear to me (-1, Troll)

cold fjord (826450) | about 10 months ago | (#45678369)

You seem to be insinuating that Julian Assange is either an asset of, or associates with, one or more intelligence agencies. But a TLA is a bit restrictive, don't you think? It seems unlikely that it would be CIA or NSA since he has directed a great deal of his attention on the US. Maybe FSB or some other foreign agency? Or maybe he's gone SPECTRE. Or were you thinking something else?

Re:The conclusion is not clear to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678445)

Are you dense? He's "insinuating" something eminently reasonable: somebody ELSE was wiretapping Iceland, and he'd been leaked the recordings.

Re:The conclusion is not clear to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678533)

You should probably reread both posts, carefully.

Re:The conclusion is not clear to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678651)

It's quite apparent that none of you read anything. Fail.

Re:The conclusion is not clear to me (1)

canadiannomad (1745008) | about 10 months ago | (#45678481)

Jesus Christ. I think that we have recordings of all phone calls to and from the Icelandic parliament during the past four months

I stop expecting much when they can't even copy a quote correctly... It gets the gist across, but isn't exactly what was said.

>jesus
>mm?
>looks like we have the last 4 mothers of all audio to all phones in the .is parliament.
>s/mothers/months

That actually sounds more interesting to me... But definitely says nothing about him placing anything anywhere.

Re:The conclusion is not clear to me (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 10 months ago | (#45678543)

I think they tried to translate it from internet-dialect to something a bit more formal.

Internet-dialect makes english teachers cry.

Assange and associates? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678335)

So now we can conclude that Assange is an overseas asset of the CIA?

Troll article (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678365)

Is it just me or does this seem like a troll article submission?

As usual the answer to the posed question in the headline is 'no'.

The Empire strikes back (1)

rudolfel (700883) | about 10 months ago | (#45678409)

News at 11

Wait, wait, wait. (3, Insightful)

Max Threshold (540114) | about 10 months ago | (#45678439)

Go back to that part where parliament is not violating laws.

Any time a head-line starts with a question (1)

jblues (1703158) | about 10 months ago | (#45678509)

Classic law of journalism strikes again: Any time a head-line starts with a question, the answer is 'no'.

Do not care since I am going to North Korean baby! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678527)

If Rodman can go why not? Hope I can get to watch an execution or two! Maybe I can pull a Snowden and become one of them. I would a king among them.

100% free software, proper encryption, and review (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678529)

It is absolutely ridicules that we don't have communications systems that are properly secured with encryption and code that has been thoroughly reviewed. I suspect event the poorest governments in Africa could afford to develop such a system.

NSA leaked a backup (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678563)

It's just probaly an NSA-leak from their backups.

Is this the dumbest premise ever posted to ./? (2)

MRe_nl (306212) | about 10 months ago | (#45678567)

An anonymous reader writes.

Interesting use of "involved". (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678569)

So "involved with" means "NSA gets a tap on it, Manning gets a copy, gives it to Assange, and therefore he's involved with wiretapping Iceland's parliament". I guess samezenpus is also involved with wiretapping a foreign government to, then, eh?

No one is to be spared (2)

korbulon (2792438) | about 10 months ago | (#45678599)

Goose, meet gander.

Pot, meet kettle.

Glass house, meet stone.

Turnabout, meet fair play.

Goes around, meet comes around.

Sowed wind, meet whirlwind.

Dances-with-devils, meet the piper.

And in US helicopters. (5, Funny)

PhilHibbs (4537) | about 10 months ago | (#45678679)

Assange had gun cam footage from US helicopters in Iraq. Clearly he's been sneaking into military bases and installing cameras in the helicopters. They never showed that in the movie!

Re:And in US helicopters. (1)

HnT (306652) | about 10 months ago | (#45678899)

You have got to be on to something because, see, this also works equally well as it does for the summary!

"Given that the parliament is not violating laws it is clear that Assange or his associates would have to have installed recording devices or wiretaps on US helicopters in Iraq". Undeniable right there!

assange tasked with rescuing the queen mothership (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678721)

they're neighbors. still celebrating the new blog format seems more like the old one again. hang on to our hemispheres, free the innocent stem cells......

Seeding the leaks? (1)

Stolzy (2656399) | about 10 months ago | (#45678747)

Is it possible that the USA could start seeding whistle-blower's leaks with information that would put them at further risk of legal prosecution? /Stolzy

The award for "most bias news analysis" goes to... (3, Insightful)

AC-x (735297) | about 10 months ago | (#45678765)

Why would anyone who was actually involved in the wiretapping sound surprised when he found the wiretapping data he allegedly made? It makes no sense.

What does make sense is if either the leaked cables also contained this data, or someone else leaked the data to wikileaks but they hadn't got round to looking at it yet.

Fuck the what now!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678799)

Sheesh, this is a reach even for the usual character assassins. Assange is no 'hacker' he just publishes shit people pass him.

Slashdot is becoming the first landing of the USA propaganda. No credibility left anymore.

That's a pretty big "given" (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 10 months ago | (#45678821)

Given that the parliament is not violating laws

That's not "given" at all.

it is clear that Assange or his associates would have to have installed recording devices or wiretaps in the parliament

a) It's not remotely clear even if we do accept the premise above
b) If it was true he probably wouldn't be quite so surprised at finding all those recordings.

Let's play "Blame the Whistle Blower" (1)

DrJimbo (594231) | about 10 months ago | (#45678827)

Assange posted footage of an Apache helicopter crew murdering innocent civilians. How could he possibly have that footage if he wasn't involved in the murders? It is clear that Assange or his associates would have to have installed the video recording device in the helicopter.

Random facts. (3)

sporri (70882) | about 10 months ago | (#45678847)

Here goes, sorry about the references in Icelandic.

In 2010 an unmarked laptop was discovered in an empty office at Alingi connected to the local network, the parliament offices are adjunct to the main building. The computer was running but after being shut down by employees of Alingi it self destruct and forensics did not come up with anything. ( http://www.dv.is/frettir/2011/1/20/grunur-um-njosnir-althingi-dularfull-tolva-fannst-i-audu-herbergi/). Around the same time that the computer was discovered Julian Assange was working in Iceland cutting the videos that would become Collateral Murder along with member of parlament Birgitta Jonsdottir and a group of other people on of which has been known in Iceland as Siggi hakkari (Siggi the hacker) a 17 year old boy with, well truth be said, very limited morals (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/06/wikileaks-mole/all/) Siggi was at the time giving information to the FBI as well as running for Wikileaks and running his own scams, stealing money (http://www.visir.is/-og-bdquo;siggi-hakkari-og-ldquo;-grunadur-um-milljonasvik/article/2013130609737) and is now applealing a case where he was sentenced for sexual crimes against a seventeen year old boy (http://www.dv.is/frettir/2013/11/19/siggi-braut-sautjan-ara-pilt-WRMWNX/) He's a dubious caracter this Siggi. Peronally I dont think that Wikileaks had any access to real data from Althingi and that was part of Siggi's scams to get into the Wikileaks crowd and, believe it or not, the offices of Alingi are not breaking the law about recording phonecalls.

Then there is the case of the jumping packages, which is totally unrelated and has been well documented in Icelandic (http://ruv.is/sarpurinn/spegillinn/26112013-0) basically the Icelandic telecom (síminn) had faulty equipment in Canada that advertised wrong BGP routes between the 31st of july until the 22th of august and as they did not have prefix filters in place in some other endpoints these routes got advertised to the internet. There are long personal discussion threads about this on facebook in direct communications between the technicians working at the Icelandic telecom and some of the other telco's in Iceland. These guys know their stuff and have no reason to take part's in cover-ups for hackers as the community of networking experts in Iceland is very small and these guys know each other personally.

Surprising ! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678853)

You know what's really surprising about this ?
Thomas didn't post this mind-numbingly illogical story.

The language spoken (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45678903)

Maybe the NSA needs help understanding phone calls made in a language spoken by less than half a million people alive!

Assange responsible for Kennedy assassination (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45679009)

Citation: This post

I know what this is... (1)

3seas (184403) | about 10 months ago | (#45679227)

Its a test to see if the sheeple count has gone down and how far.

Siggi "the hacker" (1)

kbg (241421) | about 10 months ago | (#45679273)

It is possible this was the work of Siggi "the hacker".
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-06/28/wikileaks-mole [wired.co.uk]
He was fired from Wikileaks after he transferred money from Wikileaks to his personal account. He then contacted FBI and was thought he was to be used as some kind of bait for Wikileaks. He has then been connected to number of other shady deals here in Iceland. I believe he is currently in Prison for a sexual assault.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?