15 ms·
Ecuador Says It Still Backs Assange, but WikiLeaks Says It Cut His Internet
- hammock 10y agoWikileaks: Multiple US sources tell us John Kerry asked Ecuador to stop Assange from publishing Clinton docs during FARC peace negotiations. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788369924175441920 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788369924175441920
- mc32 10y agoWhelp, he was being used. And I'm sure he knows that, but now that EC has other things on their minds more important than being a thorn to American politics, it's back to Realpolitik and Assange releasing info which may further embarrass their horse in the American political race would counter their political cause, so it becomes a casualty.
- dntrkv 10y agoMultiple US sources say Assange is pulling a PR stunt. Multiple US sources say Trump is the anti christ. Multiple US sources say Assange is a false flag placed by the Reptilians. Wow, this is easy!
- thingexplainer 10y agoThis isn't a very interesting criticism. If WikiLeaks says an anonymous source told them something that is a.) completely believable and b.) isn't what a onymous source would be able to say, I see no reason to doubt them. I don't have an extraordinarily high confidence in a claim based on an anonymous witness alone, but journalists (lets squint hard enough to still call Assange a journalist for a moment) do this all the time. Do you have other evidence to bring to the table? Do you have reason to doubt a.) or b.)?
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y agoIrrelevant to your point, but I hadn't heard “onymous” as the antonym of “anonymous” before, thank you for that.
- thingexplainer 10y agoIt isn't a real word I'm afraid, but an FBI invention. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Onymous https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Onymous
- Etzos 10y agoIt is a real word though. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=onymous&searchmode=none http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&searc...
- thingexplainer 10y agoThanks, learned something new.
- zem 10y agointeresting, I've always used "nonymous" for that, but "onymous" is etymologically sounder
- jcranmer 10y agoYeah, I was going to say "nonymous" was etymologically superior, but then I looked up the etymology for anonymous before hitting send. Given that the English (/Germanic) is "name" and the French is "nom", I would have expected the PIE for name to be some sort of "nVm"-ish thing, whence I expected the Greek to render it is some sort of "non"-ish thing. The actual Greek is ónoma, with the PIE being something like *hnómn. (So my PIE guess was right-ish, but the transition to Hellenic was wrong).
- antman 10y ago
- gjolund 10y agoSo do you think he just forgot to pay his bill?
- dogma1138 10y agoAnd why is that a bad thing? you can't leak stuff during negotiations it blows everything up. The FARC deal is now dead as it seems since the referendum has failed but if there was anything in those emails that could have jeopardized the deal it should not have been released.
- cmdrfred 10y agoIf the truth blows up your negotiations, you are a cheat.
- tocotun1 10y agoWho believes the Colombian government has ever had the upper hand in the FARC negotiations? For fuck's sake, they are having to negotiate with a terrorist organisation. It's obvious the gov is handcuffed.
- dogma1138 10y agoYou don't know how negotiations work do you? Everyone comes to the table with points that would make the other side walk away, and everyone has their initial redlines. These change during the negotiations, premature release of information backs one or both parties into a corner in which further negotiations are no longer possible. This is the real world, not some fairy tale.
- toomuchtodo 10y ago> This is the real world, not some fairy tale. Indeed. And in this world now, information asymmetry is greatly reduced. Politicians can live with it. The fairy tale is you can hide your dirty laundry until you've fleeced your negotiating opponent.
- dogma1138 10y agoIt's not dirty laundry its negotiations the deal would become public. Look at how many deals with Iran and N. Korea blew up early own because one side leaked (usually intentionally to tank the negotiations) some information that meant no further negotiations would be possible.
- untog 10y agoYou know the wikileaks Twitter account is Assange, right? I'm going to wait for a reliable third party report on this one.
- arkitaip 10y agoIs Assange the only one using the wikileaks twitter account? Because it's batshit crazy at times https://heatst.com/politics/wikileaks-posts-and-deletes-anti-semitic-tweet-as-it-does-putins-bidding-for-trump/ https://heatst.com/politics/wikileaks-posts-and-deletes-anti...
- snovv_crash 10y agoIf anything, that website you linked is batshit crazy. At least Wikileaks had the sense to delete the tweets.
- neves 10y agoThe guy is locked with Ecuadorian TV and English food. It is completely plausible that he goes batshit crazy at times. :-)
- thingexplainer 10y agoWhile I agree that Assange has been under an incomprehensible amount of stress for such a long time, he is getting increasingly radical and less journalistic, such as his (edit: alleged) vendetta against Clinton.
- imron 10y agoHe has repeatedly stated that he would happily release information on Trump and the Republicans if someone would leak it to him.
- thingexplainer 10y agoI'm sure he would, that doesn't make it appropriate to use leaked information to carry out a vendetta. edit: getting source
- JohnStrange 10y agoIf that was true, how would Clinton docs affect FARC negotiations? Is Clinton habitually buying cocaine from Colombia or what would be the reason? I would understand if Kerry asked Ecuador to stop Assange from publishing Clinton docs until she has been elected or until after the next presidential debate. That would make a lot of sense. But this FARC <--> Clinton doc connection doesn't.
- Sebguer 10y agoYou're misunderstanding, the claim is that it was 'during', not 'because'. Kerry was there as part of the negotiations, and supposedly had a private meeting where he made the request. Not that I particularly believe this, just clarifying for you!
- empath75 10y agoThe state department probably asks ecuador to turn over assange every single time they talk to someone in ecuador.
- AnimalMuppet 10y agoHowever, we only have one source for the claim of multiple sources. When Wikileaks dumps a bunch of documents, I trust that those are real documents. But I'm not sure that I trust Wikileaks when they release publicity for themselves.
- ww520 10y agoThat sounds like state sponsored censorship.
- raverbashing 10y agoAssange is still living and being protected there, right? This is the important support.
- nateberkopec 10y agoHow does this affect Assange's supposed "dead-man" switch? Wasn't the idea that he has the push the switch every 24 hours? Wouldn't that require internet access?
- dimino 10y agoI suspect they've disabled it, or somehow changed it to a more manual process, e.g. phone call or physical meeting.
- dogma1138 10y agoDoes he even has a dead-man switch? It is quite contradictory to his own philosophy or releasing everything without any consideration or censorship. If he is holding something excessively damning it's quite problematic for for his supports and him, eventually that information would start losing it's value and it will not be a dead-man switch anymore. This is also a problem because it forces him to dig more and more dirt that can be used as a dead-man switch rather than releasing the information.
- squidfood 10y ago> It is quite contradictory to his own philosophy or releasing everything without any consideration or censorship. You mean the philosophy that has him releasing material with carefully timed consideration to maximize attention to his own pet cause?
- MichaelGG 10y agoCarefully timed means biggest impact, which means Wikileaks stays high profile, gets more funding, etc. There's nothing wrong with being a bit self serving if that results in an overall higher score on whatever your final criteria are.
- squidfood 10y agoFine, but then one can't claim his philosophy has anything to do with "releasing everything without any consideration or censorship." He is de-facto censoring/holding back knowledge that he possesses, with a specific agenda in mind.
- dimino 10y agoHow important is Assange, himself, to WikiLeaks? If he's critical to its operating capabilities, why?
- jelly 10y agoI believe his functional importance is in keeping dead man switches from triggering, the site is his insurance policy. He also gives an interesting public face to the website, given he is permanently embroiled in scandal. Arguably Assange's keeping wikileaks in the public eye is more important than his technical or mechanical function
- vkou 10y ago> I believe his functional importance is in keeping dead man switches from triggering, the site is his insurance policy. This serves Assange more then it serves WikiLeaks.
- johnfjacobi 10y agoWell, he's kind of egotistical, something even his supporters know well. He tends to be a bottleneck for the organization's operations.
- snovv_crash 10y agoAFAIK he's the figurehead that takes all the heat so that others can get work done in the background.
- paulmd 10y agoYou know when a guest just won't catch a hint and leave? "Oops the internet went out again". Assange has been couch-surfing for 6 years now and by all accounts he's not a particularly good house guest. Nobody likes that arrogant asshole who gets drunk and smashes up your furniture. [1] Sure, he doesn't have anywhere to go, but at the end of the day that's not Ecuador's problem. He's thrown himself on their good graces and he's not being very gracious about it. Indeed he's even working with Russia to stir up trouble - not just publishing Russian-sourced material, but working directly with Russia, to the extent that RT was linking into Wikileaks content even before Wikileaks announced they were up [2] I imagine the police reports filed earlier this month alleging that he was trying to groom an 8-year-old for sex online aren't helping matters either [3]. That's very possibly the direct catalyst for cutting off his internet at this juncture. On a personal level I do feel bad for Assange. It can't be easy to be in de-facto house arrest in someone else's house for 6 years, so it's not surprising that he's succumbing to some potential alcohol-related issues and lashing out on a personal and professional basis. [1] https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/mr-white-and-mr-blue https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/mr-white-and-mr-blue > A security guard was on duty at around 8:30pm on 6 September, when Assange was in the embassy with two associates. Around this time, the guard discovered that Assange had made his way into the embassy’s secure control room – a room strictly off-limits to him – and started tampering with the security equipment. This led to a scuffle between Assange and the guard that caused damage to the embassy’s equipment. > The report then details conflicting accounts of what happened. According to the security guard’s account, Assange was asked to stop messing with the embassy’s systems and to leave the secure room, which he initially refused to do. The guard alleges that Assange then punched over a computer monitor before grabbing him by the shirt. This led, according to the guard, to an altercation for a number of minutes that spilled out into the corridor. > Assange’s account lays the blame on the security guard, who he claimed had accosted him. > A filmmaker who was present for the incident, the report notes, told embassy staff he did not see the beginning of the scuffle, but that Assange was “out of control” and very upset, and clearly wanted to be verbally offensive and to provoke a reaction. > However, just a few months later a separate report notes a similar incident of seemingly erratic behaviour from the WikiLeaks chief shortly before dawn on 4 January 2013. The report painstakingly notes Assange’s movements from minute to minute – further evidence of how closely the Ecuadorians monitored “Mr Guest” – reporting that he seemed to wake at 6:05 that morning. Then, just five minutes later, the security guard heard a loud crash from Assange’s room. > The report painstakingly notes Assange’s movements from minute to minute – further evidence of how closely the Ecuadorians monitored “Mr Guest” – reporting that he seemed to wake at 6:05 that morning. Then, just five minutes later, the security guard heard a loud crash from Assange’s room. > Assange came to the door, assuring the on-duty guard that everything was fine, but (according to the guard’s account) seeming to try to block his view of the room’s interior. A few minutes later, Assange left the room carrying his laptop into a nearby room designated as his bathroom, where he remained for a period of hours. > During this time, the memo continues, the guard was able to see inside Assange’s bedroom, where a large, smashed bookshelf was strewn across the room. The guard took photographs of the room’s condition. > Assange later told embassy staff that the bookshelf had fallen over of its own accord, according to the same memo, but this seemingly did little to assuage their concerns about the wellbeing of Assange or those around him. As before, the incident was passed up the embassy’s chain of command – reference is made to a daily report on his activities – including, once again, “Mr White” and “Mr Blue”. > The report notes with concern a regular comment in “internal daily reports” on Assange recording his tendency to “shout and talk incoherently” at night, attributed to night terrors. It then goes on to note: “This episode is nothing more than the result of the stress that Mr Assange could be feeling as a result of his isolation. > The report continues in quite a critical manner as to Assange’s intrinsic “nature”, independent of his stressful situation, stating that his “evident anger” and “feelings of superiority” could cause stress to those around him — “especially the personnel who work in the embassy, mainly women”. > The report contains multiple recommendations to improve the situation, including a proposal from “Mr Blue” for regular assessments of Assange’s physical and mental health, regular meetings with Assange’s confidantes to assess his demeanour and state of mind, and efforts to prevent Assange becoming isolated. > The report also notes a need to “control access to alcohol”. [2] http://usuncut.news/2016/10/13/breaking-evidence-russia-is-behind-wikileaks-dump-just-became-startlingly-obvious-details/ http://usuncut.news/2016/10/13/breaking-evidence-russia-is-b... > RT America tweeted with a link to the documents at 6:09 AM. However, WikiLeaks had not yet announced the release. They didn’t do so, in fact, until 23 minutes later. > How did RT America know that the emails were being released and how did they know where to find the documents? It’s looking more and more like Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are working directly with the Russian government to destroy the Democratic presidential candidate. [3] http://www.prweb.com/releases/united-nations-report/julian-assange-wikileaks/prweb13750603.htm http://www.prweb.com/releases/united-nations-report/julian-a... > Toddandclare became a participant in the UN Global Compact program in May 2016. This required them to release certain company records to the UN, including details of their legal interactions with Assange — which by then included a report from the Royal Bahamas Police about an investigation into Assange. (Assange is no longer involved in KATIA.) > On September 28 this year a Canadian family holidaying in the Bahamas reported to the police that their 8-year-old daughter was “sexually molested online” by Assange on Toddandclare.com, including propositioning her “to perform oral and anal sex acts.” She was presumably accessing the site through her 22-year-old sister’s account. Whether these chats were recorded or not isn’t clear but the family claims they identified Assange.
- chvid 10y agoI don't get it. What is the status of mr. Assange? Has he communicated with anyone in the past 24 hrs. If so what did he say?
- aljones 10y agoSeems like they're being purposely vague.
- bduerst 10y agoSeems like it. Just an hour or so after the "Assange's internet was cut" tweet, they tweeted for donations even though people were asking for updates: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787915227924992000 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787915227924992000
- ajross 10y agoYeah, exactly. The guy is in London and can receive visitors. All they need to do is walk into the embassy and hand him a phone to log into twitter with, and we could clear this all up with a straightforward firsthand report. Instead, we're getting hints. That's called a "stunt", folks.
- chvid 10y agoIf this is just a matter of mr. Assange paying for his own 3G connection then indeed this is a stunt. But why would WikiLeaks sacrifice their reputation like that?
- robrenaud 10y agoHow hard is it to get a cell phone with tethering? C'mon, this can't really be a big deal.
- raverbashing 10y agoNo difficulty whatsoever
- astrodust 10y agoWhen you're stuck in an embassy and surrounded by people you can't trust, and you're a de-facto enemy of the state? I'm sure a lot harder than you think.
- raverbashing 10y agoNo 'intrinsic' difficulty, that's an extrinsic difficulty.
- coleca 10y agoI'm sure the US Govt would love to give him a Samsung Galaxy Note 7 to use. But seriously, if you were him, how confident would you be that the phone wasn't tampered with, no matter who you received it from? How could Assange trust anyone at this point? I'd imagine he would be quite paranoid given what he deals with and probably more so from the period of confinement.
- mikeash 10y agoDuring the initial discussion yesterday, when it was just a vague "state party" to blame that everyone assumed meant the US and UK were isolating the embassy, a lot of people were talking about jamming cell signals. There was supposedly even an account from someone who visited the embassy and immediately lost all connectivity when they went inside. It's kind of amazing to see what people come up with in the absence of information.
- vinhboy 10y agoIs anyone else troubled by how impulsive[0] we are? Look at the original thread on this issue[1]. Hundreds of comments and conspiracy theories. And this is on HN... I am troubled by how the internet has enabled us to gossip on a global scale. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12725427 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12725427 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12737178 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12737178 - someone pointed out I actually did not know the meaning of the word "reactionary", which was my original word choice.
- ajross 10y agoIt's a chronic temporary insanity that pops up every four years or so. It will pass in exactly 21 days. Seriously: everyone here does this when we get to crazy time in the election. You're just seeing it on HN more because the Wikileaks kerfuffle happens to overlap the digital liberty stuff we talk about when the election isn't looming.
- learc83 10y agoYou don't normally have candidates insisting that the election is rigged despite having no evidence to support that assertion. The reason that the insanity subsides after the election is over, is because the majority of people accept the results. The losing candidate concedes that he was defeated fairly, and most of us move on with our lives. If 40% of the country doesn't accept the results because their candidate is telling them not too, things can quickly get out of hand.
- ajross 10y ago> You don't normally have candidates insisting that the election is rigged despite having no evidence to support that assertion. This is true, of course. But you have seen that stuff all over the right wing media, reliably, in every election of the past few decades. Trump is merely terrible at message discipline (which is to say: unlike his more mature peers, he actually believes this stuff and will repeat what he reads on Drudge); the specter of brown democrats rigging elections has been a subtext of republican electioneering forever.
- wnevets 10y agoAssange and wikileaks make it really hard to support their cause.
- optimuspaul 10y agoAssange is so untrustworthy.
- burkaman 10y agoI don't really get their strategy. Wouldn't these leaks be much more damaging to Clinton if WikiLeaks at least appeared to be unbiased? It's not like they need to be vocal, there are armies of people poring over every single release. Why not just let the documents speak for themselves?
- skylan_q 10y agoWikileaks can't appear to be unbiased to those who will perceive them as biased as a result of releasing info that may hurt Hillary Clinton. What would they have to do to appear unbiased but still be able to release information damaging to the DNC and Clintons?
- fixermark 10y agoThey could definitely appear less biased if they reigned in their Twitter account a bit. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787079640661786624 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787079640661786624
- burkaman 10y agoRelease documents, and only publicly comment on their own releases and their own business. Don't argue with people on Twitter, don't comment on Clinton scandals that have nothing to do with their leaks, don't speculate about the "ruling class" without evidence, don't offer a reward for information on Seth Rich with only "wink wink" as a reason, don't make vaguely anti-Semitic comments for no reason and then delete them, etc. If they only used Twitter to make announcements and highlight interesting documents, I think they would be orders of magnitude more trustworthy. Let the documents speak for themselves, and let other people write the commentary.
- DominikR 10y agoWikiLeaks is tweeting that US media will soon run with the story that Assange is a pedophile and took $1 million dollars from Russia. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788413380843503616 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788413380843503616 These people running the US government must be complete morons to even consider running this story. (yes: the US media is controlled by the US government, I have no doubt about it)
- unclewaltr 10y agoHis internet was cut, but they have landlines. Is it really Ecuador's obligation to provide him uninterrupted internet access? What else are they obligated to provide? They're giving him a place to hang his hat for free. We have no idea what kind of house guest this guy is. If WikiLeaks requires Assange to have internet access to function, it speaks poorly of how organized they are.