SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Multiple sources reporting:
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37680411
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2016/10/17/wikileaks-says-assanges-internet-link-was-severed-by-state-party.html
http://time.com/4532984/wikileaks-julian-assange-theories/
Wikileaks has announced that Julian Assange's internet access had been intentionally severed by a state actor. I would assume this means they disrupted a VPN connection he had rather than just cutting all internet access to the Ecuadorian Embassy, but again details are limited.
The announcement of disruption was also preceded by multiple strange tweets of random numbers (likely crypto keys) that appear to be part of a dead man system activated by the disruption.
takyon: The full tweet states "Julian Assange's internet link has been intentionally severed by a state party. We have activated the appropriate contingency plans." Wikileaks recently released Part 9 of the Podesta Emails. Also at CNET and Ars Technica.
Update: Wikileaks says: "We can confirm Ecuador cut off Assange's internet access Saturday, 5pm GMT, shortly after publication of Clinton's Goldman Sachs speechs."
Perhaps the embassy's perennial guest has finally overstayed his welcome?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by takyon on Monday October 17 2016, @08:04PM
Hey, there's a smudge on my screen!
https://news.google.com/news/section?q=wikileaks+clinton [google.com]
22 toxic days for Hillary Clinton [politico.com]
WikiLeaks Exposes Clinton’s LGBT Support as Scripted Political Expediency [observer.com]
‘Remember, it’s illegal to possess’ WikiLeaks Clinton emails, but ‘it’s different for the media,’ says CNN’s Chris Cuomo [washingtonpost.com]
WikiLeaks emails show Clinton campaign collected data to discredit Bill Clinton accuser [washingtonpost.com]
WikiLeaks: Podesta lamented that a Muslim, not a white man, named as killer in 2015 massacre [foxnews.com]
Hillary Clinton Liked Covert Action if It Stayed Covert, Transcript Shows [nytimes.com] (Syria)
Hillary Worried About Jihadists Entering With Refugees In Private Speech [dailycaller.com]
This reminds me a lot of the Wikileaks release of diplomatic cables. There were new, minor stories daily back then. It's hard to say there is a "smoking gun", but there are plenty of stories in here that do not reflect well on Hillary Clinton. And whereas "Cablegate" smeared various countries as much as the U.S., these emails are focused mostly on Clinton (and Podesta). So the damage accumulates. Is it enough to affect the election? That remains to be seen, but I doubt it. Wikileaks needs to pull out a real big scandal, or something unrelated has to happen. I guess there's also the third debate, but I expect it to be similar to debate #2.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 17 2016, @08:13PM
This whole mysterious "state level actor" thing doesn't help either. The embassy he was in cut him off, why didn't he just say that? Instead he went with a deliberately ominous message implying the NSA got up in his internetz, a message that he must of known would be blowback once the actual state was named. Its like he's peppermint patty and we are all charlie brown. How many times does he think can yank that ball away before everybody just wanders off to watch a real football game?
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 17 2016, @08:32PM
Actually, it was Lucy but, whatever.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 17 2016, @08:57PM
> Actually, it was Lucy but, whatever.
Not in Bizarroworld Peanuts!
But thanks, you are right, I just brainfarted.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 18 2016, @01:03AM
In one instance it was Violet. (This was actually the very first time the ball was pulled away from Charlie Brown, in the early days of the strip.)
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 17 2016, @08:44PM
Ominous messages are a Wikileaks forte, that's for sure. They have just the right (or wrong) balance of attention whoring and fulfillment.
It doesn't make sense for them to "know" (since this is all still unconfirmed) that a "state party" cut it off without knowing it was Ecuador. The first tweet comes off as a hype-y attempt to sound cool and mysterious, especially with the "We have activated the appropriate contingency plans" bit. Maybe someone else here can try to explain how they could be sure it was a state party without being sure it was Ecuador.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 17 2016, @08:34PM
‘Remember, it’s illegal to possess’ WikiLeaks Clinton emails, but ‘it’s different for the media,’ says CNN’s Chris Cuomo
Putting aside the question of if it is illegal to posess Clinton's leaked emails (I *think* it is not illegal to merely locate and possess them, but I am not a lawyer), the sad thing is that this statement that "it's different for the media" is true.
The government has several times taken illegal action (either accidentally, or nefariously), and much like in international politics, might-makes-right. In a very real sense, media are different, much like the powerful are different just by nature of being powerful. It's very much a realpolitik idea that being part of the media, with a large organization with proven deep pockets and willingness to raise a fuss, does make things different (not more or less illegal, just different in practice).
For example, consider "protecting sources." If Congress calls an ordinary person to reveal a confidential source, and the person refuses to do so, the person is thrown in jail for Contempt of Congress and forgotten about until they give in. If Congress calls on a reporter to reveal a confidential source, and the reporter refuses to do so, the reporter is also thrown in jail for Contempt of Congress just the same. The difference is that their media organization, and probably all media organizations, herd together to raise awareness and a fuss (not to mention pay legal bills), until the person is released.
Moreover, given past history of fighting and the deeper pockets, it is much more likely Congress would give up faster because they know there is less chance of outlasting the media. Plus the ability to stonewall requests better through staff-lawyers, plausibility deniability, and numerous other advantages large organizations have that individuals don't.
You don't have to like it (and probably shouldn't)... but it is true. :(
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 17 2016, @08:51PM
My take is that once Wikileaks, considered a media organization even by the U.S. government, processes and releases leaked information, it is legal to look at even if it is classified (with the exception of federal employees and members of the military who may be subject to policy restrictions). The Podesta emails are mostly personal emails with no classification involved AFAIK.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday October 17 2016, @10:35PM
" During her service as secretary of state, Clinton supported every war demanded by the military industrial complex"
That ONE line from http://observer.com/2016/10/wikileaks-exposes-clintons-lgbt-support-as-scripted-political-expediency/ [observer.com] tells so much: people think Hillary would do less harm internationally than Trump, but already Obama is making noise against Russia and Hillary will take you into war with them because.... good for mil/Ind is good for Hillary.
Come on wiki-leaks... before she gets elected and they start finding;
'weapons of mass hacker Assange whateverHillaryneedstostartaWarwithRussiaorWhoever.....'
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 18 2016, @01:16AM
Oh yeah, we already had a Cablegate, didn't we? If Hillary cut the cable it would have been a good name for this. Scissorgate? Slashpocalypse?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 18 2016, @02:21AM
Slashpocalypse?
Already had that. Fuck Beta. :)