Plugging the WikiLeak: What can the government do?

Sorry totally off-base: major brainfart.

[edit on 7-8-2010 by mydarkpassenger]

A better question would be is there anything we can do against the pentagon? Not suggesting anything illegal, but im sure there are millions of people who believe that revealing the truth regarding crimes committed by the government and military is a noble cause and one we must continue to support....they would stand with wikileaks against the pentagons internet operations imo, just tell them how to help. The government are really showing how blatantly corrupt they are, a desperate frenzy of statements...a sure sign that the internet is tearing the military industrial complex a new one.

reply to post by Solomons



Maybe I'm stretching the on-topicness of this, but I've wondered this for awhile so I'll just kinda piggyback off your comment.

Is there any way us lowly sheeple can attempt to take the Pentagon or White House officials to court? I imagine it would be instantly blocked, but whatever happens to those people that randomly try to take a high-ranking official to court?

How can they NOT show up in court? If I don't show up in court, I'm arrested. Does anyone see where I'm going with this? Is it plausible at all?

I know what they can do. Stop doing retarded crap that could embarrass them in documents that could possibly be one day leaked.

It's like they're getting angry that their atrocities are coming to light rather than being angry that these atrocities are being carried out... probably because they sanctioned them to begin with.

Originally posted by sputniksteve
reply to post by I AM LEGION

 

It was Valerie Plame, not Palma.

Edit** Memory Shock, what on earth are Anonymous going to do versus the US government? Like they are going to strike out if this happened or something? What was the meaning of your post? Just curious.

[edit on 8/7/2010 by sputniksteve]

I am unsure what he meant, but i can say that "Anonymous" is not just a specific group. It is a movement, an ideology. The belief that the individual can strike out against the machine and make a meaningful impact. That with the way the world has evolved, the future of warfare will involve hero's who create their impacts anonymously, for to do otherwise would risk certain death.

In cyber warfare, you can never be certain who is doing what. The "e world" has given us a certain anonymity. Of course, if Obama has his way, your "RL" name will be tied to all "e life" actions. No longer will anonymity be possible without risking life and limb.

reply to post by mydarkpassenger


RSA vs AES

I dont think there is anything a government can do if needed, if it means voting a new law, they'll do it.

Originally posted by Kaynos
I dont think there is anything a government can do if needed, if it means voting a new law, they'll do it.

The problem with this lies in the fact that the public is hyperaware of what is going on politically. There are people who are up in arms.

The question i guess is, is the public really smart enough to see that the failure of logic in the puppet show they are watching isn't the culprit, but rather the puppet masters themselves? Will the public even notice that it is a puppet show? This is where we are at the crux of the issue for our future.

Knowing that something is wrong is the first step, and just about everybody is there. The divergence we have is the next step: what to do about it? Until we can identify the root cause at a consensus level, whatever we do will only propagate a further regime of lies and deceit. A wave of the hand from the linguistic master Jedi's in DC is often enough to quell the bleating of The People.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


This is not a war and Anonymous are not combatants. Anonymous as a group and as an idea cannot go up against government agencies no matter how many proxys you hide behind =) Don't get this confused with an idea you might have.

I am not trying to insult you texan, It just seems to me like wishful thinking.

Originally posted by sputniksteve
Edit** Memory Shock, what on earth are Anonymous going to do versus the US government? Like they are going to strike out if this happened or something? What was the meaning of your post? Just curious.

You forget that the government is comprised of people...much like Anonymous.

The lines that are perceived to have been drawn are based upon inadequate perceptions.

Do you really think that WikiLeaks happened without people on the inside? And do you really think that it was only one or two people?

That's not air you're breathing...

Be careful what side you take here unless you want to be deemed a terrorist who is lending support to a terrorist organization and be stripped of citizenship.

Don't mess with the MIC's $$$ bottomline.

reply to post by againuntodust


The people could organize and call the government terrorists.

Oh right, they are. And that's why they are overreacting. They are getting killed off. They can enjoy extinction. I am a free man.

Originally posted by I AM LEGION

Plugging the WikiLeak: What can the government do?

Lets hope they dont try the top kill method


get it leak plug government oooook moving along

[edit on 7-8-2010 by hillbilly4rent]

You have to remember that a lot of the 'successful' heavy encryption cracks are done with access to the computer that was used to encrypt the file in the first place - IE Some implementation problem - the passphrase might be in memory - or some side channel means - like watching or listening to hear the passphrase.

The encryption that Assange used is very secure, as far a file, already encrypted released - it's VERY secure to the best of my knowledge.

If McCain had his way, years ago, such encryption would not have been available to the public, and it would have been regulated like a weapon, like a missile. Heck, if McCain would have had HIS way, we'd not even be able to have secure financial transactions across the border, like to buy a book from Canada - because that would have been exporting illegal arms!

Originally posted by sputniksteve
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

This is not a war and Anonymous are not combatants. Anonymous as a group and as an idea cannot go up against government agencies no matter how many proxys you hide behind =) Don't get this confused with an idea you might have.

I am not trying to insult you texan, It just seems to me like wishful thinking.

Brother, there is no insult there, nor any taken.

what i am talking about is a change in thinking.

Look, the world you live in today is alien to the world i grew up in. I was in 2nd grade when Reagan was shot. i remember when Atari first hit the market I bought Mike Tysons Punch Out when it was 50 bucks a copy (funny....all these years later and games are the exact same price...but i digress).

My point here is that the world has changed, and we are evolving or adapting to live within it. The old rules don't exist. If ABC/NBC/CBS decide to run a story, only a segment of the population will see it now, where in years past it was closer to 100%.

In Vietnam you could intercept communications, but you could not read the dossier of the commanders. Now you can, if you are savvy enough. In years past, our only recourse was our 2nd Amendment rights.

Now, we have the 1st Amendment as a true weapon of The People. You and I can wield great power using our 1st Amendment rights. We can bring about revolution without firing a shot. This is far, far better than a bloodletting, to be sure.

But the only way you can guarantee that the bloodletting doesn't happen is if you can remain anonymous. Anonymity is the key to using your 1st Amendment rights as a weapon when confronting The Machine. Otherwise you end up blacklisted or worse....dead.

[edit on 7-8-2010 by bigfatfurrytexan]

reply to post by I AM LEGION


I think Judge Napolitano said it best on what is acceptable under current laws. They are trying to pass shield laws to protect only corporate media now. This will be another move to expand government power.

wiki leaks will save American Lives. There is no way America can "win" in either war..especially in Afghanistan....no one has toppled that nation in 1000 years....whitey is no match for folks who will die for God. At best we will privately secure the mineral wealth and the opium crop and that will be at a much lower rate then is desired. Funny with all the domestic spending concerns..no one raised any concern about getting into these wars that have cost 1 billion per month. The U.S has issued over 1 ton of ordinance for every kill in Iraq and Afghanistan--that is 2000lbs of metal, DU and gun powder for each soft target (human kill)! What's the cost of that? No One bothers to want to prosecute the Bush Admin for outright lying and fear mongering that convinced Congress to embark on these costly wars. Banksters yes--pretty well f%#ked up...The Industrial-Pharma-Petro-Defense Cartel has really drained the coffers. And we are not getting most of our equipment back from the desert....Iraqi kids will be hot wiring Hummers for another 2 decades and living in Connex boxes---courtesy of the U.S Taxpayers. We are a sick country that needs to work on itself for a good decade or more to come out of this tailspin

reply to post by I AM LEGION

Since this is a national security issue, we do have 'other options' sitting on the table. Some of those more questionable options are probably already in motion, and it is only a matter of time until this issue is dealt with.

Within the next week or two, expect some seriously controversial news cycles. While we are all too busy looking to the left, the U. S. government will make their quiet and methodical move on the right.

Who says you have to walk through the front door?

Headlines:
"WikiLeaks Owner Assange commits suicide, and leaves note expressing his paranoia about the United States government."

"Wikileaks Owner's home and offices were burned down in a mysterious fire."

"WikiLeaks Owner Assange goes into hiding, and no one knows where he has gone."

"Oops... WikiLeaks Owner Assange releases 77,000 U.S. documents, which turned out to be 77,000 British National Security documents."

"WikiLeaks Owner Assange dies in a serious car accident."

"WikiLeaks Owner Assange gets arrested for soliciting controversial pornography."

Take your pick. Do you think we have spies for nothing? Why do you think he has stepped up his 'insurance' game plan? He is running paranoid.

[edit on 7-8-2010 by Section31]

HAHAHAHA!

*breathes*

HAHAHAHA!

Quote from OP: "...Pentagon and other government secured websites..."

Remember Gary McKinnon? Yeah, he "hacked" his way into the pentagon's computers by programming his little Asperger's Perl Script to knock on government server doors that responded to empty passwords. What an evil genius hacker we have there, Lou!

Behold, the very same government who was smart enough to create TCP/IP in the first place (DARPA) uses blank passwords to protect top secret classified documents.

This post isn't very on topic but when I read "government secured websites" I about had an accident.

I still can't dismiss the idea that this could be a False Flag operation to control the internet.