Have you heard of WikiLeaks and it's efforts to stay online?

By Danny Kemp(AFP)–2 days agoLONDON — The WikiLeaks website was fighting to stay online Saturday after Sweden issued a new arrest warrant for its elusive chief and it battled cyber attacks and government attempts to silence it.The whistleblowing website's founder Julian Assange briefly broke cover to say he had boosted his security after receiving death threats amid the storm unleashed by his site's publication of some 250,000 US diplomatic cables.In Stockholm, Swedish prosecutors issued a new international arrest warrant for Assange -- who is believed to be in Britain -- on sex assault allegations that incorporated missing elements requested by British police."They were asking for additional information concerning the maximum penalty for all the crimes and infractions on the file. We usually only include the most severe offence," which was rape in this case, prosecution office spokeswoman Karin Rosander told AFP.Reports in Britain said Assange could be arrested within 10 days.The website was forced to turn to Switzerland for a new domain name after its original [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] address was shut down by an American provider, while Paris tried to ban French servers from hosting it.The Swiss address was up and running on Saturday again after migrating to new servers to buck closure by its US host, the group which owns the name said."About two hours after the deactivation of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] by [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] we acquired a heap of redundant DNS Servers," the Swiss Pirates Party said.It earlier listed another 21 alternative websites where WikiLeaks could also be found, many of them European domain names and including its German counterpart.[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] was itself taken offline by then US host provider [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] late Friday, hours after being set up by Swiss supporters as an alternative to Assange's blocked [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].The Swiss Pirates Party, which campaigns for Internet freedoms and transparency, was founded in 2009.Denis Simonet, who heads the group, told AFP it had registered the domain name [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] six months ago."We did it to support WikiLeaks," he said, adding that it was not done at the request of Julian Assange, founder of the whistleblower site.The link to the Swiss Pirates Party's Wikileaks broader access list is at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] . The latest cables released by the site showed US officials suspected that Yemen had a secret cache of shoulder-fired missiles that could have threatened US forces if the weapons fell into the wrong hands.Other cables highlighted what US officials described as Britain's "paranoia" about its so-called special relationship with Washington.In an online question and answer session with The Guardian newspaper, Assange vowed to resist the "attacks against us by the US.""The threats against our lives are a matter of public record. However, we are taking the appropriate precautions to the degree that we are able when dealing with a superpower," the 39-year-old Australian wrote.Former US Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee has said those responsible for supplying the leaked cables should face execution, while some pundits have called for Assange to be assassinated.Assange's lawyer in London, Mark Stephens, said that neither Scotland Yard nor he had received the new arrest warrant released by Sweden.Stephens linked the warrant to "sophisticated" efforts to take down the website, suggesting that a "state actor" was behind efforts to silence Assange.In France, Industry Minister Eric Besson called for WikiLeaks to be banned from French servers, saying it was endangering lives. "France cannot host Internet sites that violate the confidentiality of diplomatic relations and put in danger people protected by diplomatic secrecy," Besson wrote to the main body governing the Internet in France.Amazon booted WikiLeaks off its computer servers on Wednesday following pressure from US politicians, and a day later a group of senators introduced legislation to make it illegal to publish the names of informants serving the US military and intelligence community.WikiLeaks branded Amazon "cowardly" in a Twitter message on Friday.The US military in Iraq was trying to prevent soldiers from viewing WikiLeaks documents and has posted a web advisory suggesting they could be breaking the law, a spokeswoman said on Saturday.The warning, posted Friday, pops up on the US military's unclassified network, NIPRNet, before soldiers can access news and other websites and tells troops they should not view, download, or forward the secret releases.But Staff Sergeant Kelli Lane said the military was not blocking the Internet."USF-I has not blocked any news websites from being read," the US army press officer said in an e-mail to AFP.Lane said that the advisory only serves as a warning and does not prohibit armed forces personnel from viewing the news websites. She did not say which news websites were affected.On the Net:

• WikiLeaks.ch:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
  

Copyright © 2010 AFP. All rights reserved.[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]Related articles

• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
  AFP-36 minutes ago
  
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
  AFP-2 days ago
  
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
  Salon-20 hours ago
  
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
  

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

	[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Any thoughts on this?

Hi,
Yeah.
Oh-yeah!
Briefly... I think that unconcious ... miserable ...
self-involved ... self-serving... selfish... person ...
should be imprisoned for treason. };>

Today, I finally had it brought to my attention and didn't quite understand it all... now, I understand a little better, but still have a ways to go. I DO know WikiLeaks doesn't seem to be a service to "help" anyone in a good way, from what I have seen, so far.

Wikileaks has been releasing stolen classified documents.
This action may be exposing many of our troops and diplomats to possible harm, among other things.

Exactly WHO does WikiLeaks benefit? Any idea of it's real purpose?

Seems to me that it benefits enemies of America the most.

"Today, I finally had it brought to my attention ..."
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] How is Tithe?
(Besides pissed-off! about this moron, I mean?) [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

"Who does it benefit?" - What Tater said.
Also - in a truly! self-righteous "I WANT!! and I WILL HAVE!!
my 15 minutes!" style it benefits (for now...) the jackass!!
who owns the [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] website! I imagine.
He has sold out every! 'behind closed doors'; "at great risk"
ally (if not "friend") the U.S. and it's openly-declared friends
have had. MANY Middle-Eastern countries! have been sooo! useful
to "us" on the QT! - prviding much-needed info and support -
real and 'VERBAL'! while at the same time managing to remain in
their expected and demanded position insofar as the terrorists of
that region - and their "allies on the QT" - could tell.
ALL! those bets ore OFF, now...
I soooo! want this ...person... in JAIL! -
(it needn't necessarily be all that humane of one, either...)
NOW! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] those men and women are in serious! and very real
danger - physically! and politically.
He allegedly "thought" (?) or sao he says.. that it would -perhaps-
(Like THAT would be a genie he or ANYONE could put back into
the bottle, if not?!?) be a good idea if everyone saw how it
(diplomacy) REALLY works - behind the scenes.
WHO -after the age of 10 years- doesn't KNOW THAT?
That is why they call it DIPLOMACY! and not
"The truth As We See It" for God's sake!
This self-serving bastard ! has ... - BECAUSE HE COULD! -
and clearly showing the world that he COULD was more-important!
to this souless miscreant than the SAFETY of anyone (but him!)
I do! notice he tired to protect HIMSELF, though...) NOT well-enough though... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
*ahem*
I'm sure you are able to imagine what I'm thinking.

I WANT THE SITE - AND IT'S OWNER - SHUT! DOWN! NOW!

This "man" (I mean NO offense to actual human "men", honestly)
is the biggest sellout since CAIN.[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I find this! encouraging
It was my first attempt -
(and I'm not interested in trying any "work-arounds")
to access the *er* site... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

This is a screenshot of what I got when I tried
" [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] " [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Gee. What a shame. };>

Sadly, this screen-shotted site would not be the "source" of
the continued PUBLISHED cables and memos, anyway...

Sadly... so far (and certainly MY best and only source, anyway)
of those documents/items is the American press.
Who - God love 'em - DOES NOT! always exhibit reponsibillity
in the amount and manner I would hope that they would.

(Anyone else hear the shouted "defenses/excuses" too?)

My personal favorite always being, "If not us then someone else"
in all it's self-serving variations. Bah. ;>

If there is anything! I admire it'sa a blackmailer !
and a sexual-assalt defendant.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Excerpted from the NY Times ^ article today:

"The widely anticipated arrested came after Mr. Assange, who
denies the charges of sexual misconduct said to have been
committed while he was in Sweden in August, threatened to
release many more diplomatic cables if legal action is taken
against him or his organization."

Doesn't he sound just... swell... ? };>


Meanwhile ... cyberterrorists are taking revenge against.
the on-line sites that refused to do business any longer
with Mr. Assange.

Quite a mess, isn't it? To be honest, Tithe had no idea what was going on until I told him.
He will be checking it out and then I will have some idea what he thinks.

Oh? Well, one-up on ol' Tithe then aren't you? [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I imagine Tithe will pretty-much think what most of us
here think; this moron has put a LOT! of people at risk.

(I think it's a damned shame he isn't a U.S. citizen...)

I hope he's convicted! of the rape charges...
assuming he actually did it, of course. It (rape) does
seem in keeping with his character - no regard for what
others might be put through - just so long as he gets his way.
And he's famous - or infamous - now.
I assume that is his true goal.

Many feel the rape charges are bogus and that the woman who he supposedly raped even had a party for him a couple of days later? Not sure how the whole thing goes... haven't really checked it all out.

Like the rest of the world i have been watching this with some interest. The latest i have heard is that Assange is working togeather with a number of world leading news papers,and the information came from a whistle blower. Only about 2% of info has been published ,and some lawyers say he may not have broken any laws.
If indeed he is a sex offender he should be punished to the fullest extend of the law, but there is doubt about that as well, not surprising really, considering how many red faced politicians we have, in ALL countries .if anybody would like more on this perspective i can email you the information.

Has anyone seen any of the actual postings that were on WikiLeaks?

A sample of what is being found on WikiLeaks. As far as I can tell, a lot of posting is about things others try to cover up or lie about....

U.S. Denies Incendiary Weapon Use in Afghanistan
From Wikileaks
Jump to: navigation, search

May 14, 2009

By David Hambling (Wired)

More than a year ago, I came across a curious line item, buried in an an inventory report outlining all of the U.S. Army’s equipment in Afghanistan. It was for a bazooka that fired controversial incendiary rockets. At the time, the Army denied using the weapon, which relies on a napalm-like substance that burns skin on contact, and the matter seemed to end there. But I couldn’t help thinking about that line item again this week as a new furor has arisen over the use of incendiary weapons in Afghanistan, showing that there is likely to be renewed scrutiny into the weapons held by both sides in the Afghan conflict.

When there were allegations that the U.S. used incendiaries against civilians in an air strike on the village of Garni, the Pentagon not only denied the claims but has just declassified documents showing that the Taliban have themselves used white phosphorus bombs.

The inventory, published by Wikileaks, includes a register of all U.S. Army equipment in Afghanistan. Among the vast quantity of gear listed is a type of 66mm rocket launcher, referred to only by its reference number. Using this number it can be identified as the M202A1 “FLame Assault SHoulder weapon” or FLASH. There are two entries for FLASH launchers held by different units.

FLASH is four-barreled bazooka firing rockets loaded with an incendiary mixture. It was developed during the Vietnam era to replace flamethrowers, producing the same type of effects but with much greater range and accuracy. On impact a rocket scatters burning incendiary over a twenty-meter radius. The original filler for the rockets was napalm (in the XM191 version); this was replaced with thickened triethylaluminum (TEA), a liquid which spontaneously combusts in air and burns at high temperature. TEA reacts violently with water, so the fire must be put out with dirt or sand. A safety data sheet says that TEA is corrosive, burns skin on contact and is extremely dangerous if inhaled.

The U.S. Army manual for the weapon says FLASH is intended to be used against “enemy gun emplacements, fortified positions, and unarmored vehicles. It is also used for fighting in streets and villages.” It would be useful against caves and defensive positions in the rocky terrain of Afghanistan. The rockets are accurate enough to go through a window at 125 meters, or a bunker aperture at fifty meters. Maximum range for a larger target is five hundred meters.

Incidentally, a lot of the rockets manufactured for the FLASH are now very old and there are various horror stories about outdated ammunition with TEA leaking and rockets blowing up their users. The manual contains many warnings to this effect: “Do NOT use rocket clips that are rusted or corroded. Use of these clips may cause rocket motor blow-up and serious injury or DEATH.”

The Geneva Protocol does not ban flame or incendiary weapons, but prohibits them from being used on or near concentrations of civilians.

There has been much debate about such weapons in recent years. In 2004, U.S. forces used artillery shells loaded with the incendiary white phosphorus in Fallujah. Initially, the military claimed they these were only used to produce smoke or mark targets. It later emerged that the shells were used to target insurgents in “shake and bake” fire missions. This led to an editorial in the New York Times calling for such weapons to be banned on humanitarian grounds -– “all of us, including Americans, are safer in a world in which certain forms of conduct are regarded as too inhumane even for war.”

A similar row erupted over the use of napalm in Iraq, which the U.S. Air Force at first denied. This was because the substance was not technically napalm but a similar agent based on thickened jet fuel rather than thickened petroleum.

Dan Smith, Senior Fellow for Military Affairs at the Washington peace lobbying group Friends Committee on National Legislation, says the current legislation on flame weapons is abhorrent. He argues that a new criterion of acceptability should be adopted based on the effects on the target.

“Under this criterion, the M202A1 would be banned because like other “flame” weapons such as napalm and white phosphorous, the suffering inflicted on either military or civilian personnel is unnecessarily excessive,” says Smith. “It is no accident that in both literature and history, the descriptions of death from flames is always the most painful and agonizing.”

Our first enquiry as to whether the FLASH has been deployed or used in Afghanistan was received what looked like a flat denial.

“We are not using them and I am not aware that there are any in Afghanistan,” said Lieutenant Colonel David A. Accetta, then the Public Affairs Director for Regional Command East/CJTF-82.

However, that did not rule out there being weapons which Lt. Col. Accetta was not aware of and which were not currently being used. Further questions elicited a second response.

“Due to operational security we do not speak on the specific type or amount of weapons we have in any combat theater,” said 1st Lieut. Nathan Perry of CJTF-101 Public Affairs. He added: “All of our weapons have been legally reviewed to comply with the Law of Armed Conflict required by international law.”

In this climate, a failure to deny may speak volumes.

Thanks to David Hambing and Wired magazine for covering[1] this document. Copyright remains with the aforementioned.
Source document

* US Military Equipment in Afghanistan

I am going to check more articles. If there is one thing I have learned... don't trust the government (huge corporation) to tell the whole truth about anything.

I expect the government to have secrets. Why wouldn't they?
Nothing I've ever seen shows me the value of "secret" like the
press coverage of the Vietnam War.

This arrogant narcissist is not qualified to decide what should be told.