Diplomatic WikiLeaks

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 09 Dec 2010, 10:58

Vortex wrote: I think that the big boys will win.

They are playing away from home, and will lose. Think of it as being a bit like the Vietnam war: the big boys didn't do so well in the jungle against an enemy which knows that jungle.

Cabrone · Post by **Cabrone** » 09 Dec 2010, 11:38

Interesting story in today's Guardian.

WikiLeaks cables: Shell's grip on Nigerian state revealed

Link

The oil giant Shell claimed it had inserted staff into all the main ministries of the Nigerian government, giving it access to politicians' every move in the oil-rich Niger Delta, according to a leaked US diplomatic cable.

The company's top executive in Nigeria told US diplomats that Shell had seconded employees to every relevant department and so knew "everything that was being done in those ministries". She boasted that the Nigerian government had "forgotten" about the extent of Shell's infiltration and was unaware of how much the company knew about its deliberations.

The cache of secret dispatches from Washington's embassies in Africa also revealed that the Anglo-Dutch oil firm swapped intelligence with the US, in one case providing US diplomats with the names of Nigerian politicians it suspected of supporting militant activity, and requesting information from the US on whether the militants had acquired anti-aircraft missiles.

Although I'm not surprised it's still interesting to actually hear about it via diplomatic channels.

Big oil wrapping it's tentacles over an oil rich dodgy African regime.....who'd have thought it eh?

contadino · Post by **contadino** » 09 Dec 2010, 11:41

Vortex wrote:
And how many truck drivers were arrested for bringing the M1, the M4, the M25, and the M6 to a standstill during the fuel protests a few years ago?
The law was changed so future protestors could have their vehicles seized.
It worked: how many similar protests have you seen since?

Well, let's look at that then. How much in lost revenue did those protests cost? 20 miles of traffic at each one must've cost the economy dear.

So the government implemented some seize laws, and the next protest targeted the distribution facilities, with the effect of causing panic-buying and fuel shortages throughout the country. Who fared better out of that little melee?

Whenever the establishment fixes one of their problems, people find a different way of protesting. The same will happen on the internet.

sam_uk · Post by **sam_uk** » 09 Dec 2010, 11:49

Vortex wrote: I think that the big boys will win.

I don't understand what you mean by 'win'? Yes there is an effort to sanitise the web, it has been going on for as long as the web has existed.

The infrastructure is largely built around open standards.

TCP IP are open standards, as long as linux/ apache, power and a communications infrastructure exist then geeks will be able to make networks.

The knowledge to do this cannot easily be deleted from peoples heads or hard drives.

Probably the most vulnerable part to attack is the DNS system, that is just a problem waiting to be solved.

woodpecker · Post by **woodpecker** » 09 Dec 2010, 11:51

Exactly, contadino. The protest morphs. Even Al Q knows about morphing.

It's 20 years since the last time UCL was occupied.... (just looking at the student protests going on now). And in the meantime we've had airports targeted, tree people, Parliament Square going in and outside the law, spacehijackers (love them because they are fun), people arrested on Whitehall for reading out names of the dead, people queuing up at the Met to fill out protest forms.... And it goes on.

They always defend against yesterday's attack, yesterday's protest. But they cannot stop people, unless they themselves morph into something more Chinese.

And they do respond when confronted.

Why not help defend online rights?: join Electronic Frontier Foundation in the US, Open Rights Group in the UK etc etc

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 09 Dec 2010, 11:55

I think we are at war. The sides are, on one hand, those who wish to maintain the status quo, business as usual, the existing system that has brought us to the peak of oil production and inevitable global warming and, on the other hand, those who would have free speech, transparency, an end to killing and inequality, a sustainable future. The current battle is for control of the Internet and a digital arms race is in progress.

In any war, some battles are lost and others won, there will be victories and setbacks, but the ultimate loser is known - he who relies on oil.

The nice thing about a battle in cyberspace is that fewer bones get broken than in previous methods of warfare.

It seems from the comments on this thread that Vortex and I are on different sides in this war. I hope that this is temporary and just that Vortex has not considered the bigger picture yet. Come and join our side. It will be bumpy at times but good will triumph in the end.

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 09 Dec 2010, 12:18

Glad to see a cyber army of hackers are fighting against the attempts to close down WikiLeaks - really pleased to see that the websites of the Swedish Prosecutor and the lawyer representing the women were attacked yesterday.

The establishment have been trying to control the internet for years... nothing new there. What needs to happen is a sharp brutal attack on any corporation which dares to go along with the State Department and the CIA. Already it seems like PayPal are backtracking.

Vortex is a defeatist. Just as the printing press transformed the flows of information in Europe, the internet is doing the same thing for the world now.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z17cGHtax1

JohnB · Post by **JohnB** » 09 Dec 2010, 12:19

sam_uk wrote:Probably the most vulnerable part to attack is the DNS system, that is just a problem waiting to be solved.

Is anything happening with the DNS system at the moment? I registered a new domain a couple of days ago, and it's not working yet. They do say it can take 24-72 hours, but I don't think it's taken this long before.

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 09 Dec 2010, 12:26

Regarding the false rape charges, the feminist Naomi Wolf has written a great article on this travesty.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wol ... 93033.html

Julian Assange Captured by World's Dating Police

Dear Interpol:

As a longtime feminist activist, I have been overjoyed to discover your new commitment to engaging in global manhunts to arrest and prosecute men who behave like narcissistic jerks to women they are dating.

I see that Julian Assange is accused of having consensual sex with two women, in one case using a condom that broke. I understand, from the alleged victims' complaints to the media, that Assange is also accused of texting and tweeting in the taxi on the way to one of the women's apartments while on a date, and, disgustingly enough, 'reading stories about himself online' in the cab.

Both alleged victims are also upset that he began dating a second woman while still being in a relationship with the first. (Of course, as a feminist, I am also pleased that the alleged victims are using feminist-inspired rhetoric and law to assuage what appears to be personal injured feelings. That's what our brave suffragette foremothers intended!).

Thank you again, Interpol. I know you will now prioritize the global manhunt for 1.3 million guys I have heard similar complaints about personally in the US alone -- there is an entire fraternity at the University of Texas you need to arrest immediately. I also have firsthand information that John Smith in Providence, Rhode Island, went to a stag party -- with strippers! -- that his girlfriend wanted him to skip, and that Mark Levinson in Corvallis, Oregon, did not notice that his girlfriend got a really cute new haircut -- even though it was THREE INCHES SHORTER.

Terrorists. Go get 'em, Interpol!

Yours gratefully,

Naomi Wolf

FREE ASSANGE!

woodpecker · Post by **woodpecker** » 09 Dec 2010, 12:30

Dear LB3

'false rape charges'?

Are you the judge?

Give me strength. This is not about individuals. But if we are talking about individuals, you appear to be a half-wit.

Vortex · Post by **Vortex** » 09 Dec 2010, 12:33

I'm not a defeatist. I'm simply pointing out what will probably happen as a result of all this fuss. I don't have to take sides to make a fair guess as to what the reaction of those in power will be.

FWIW I just saw this at the DT site.

Carole Theriault, a senior security consultant at Sophos, a computer security firm, said: "If the big companies weren't locking down their information before, they're definitely doing it now.

"This is really unprecedented and DODGY TAX AVOIDERS could be next."

She added: "Hacking is illegal and it's not just the companies which are the victims of this, it's also the people who are trying to use their services to shop and the sellers of those items who can't sell them.

Vortex · Post by **Vortex** » 09 Dec 2010, 12:38

UndercoverElephant wrote:
Vortex wrote: I think that the big boys will win.
They are playing away from home, and will lose. Think of it as being a bit like the Vietnam war: the big boys didn't do so well in the jungle against an enemy which knows that jungle.

Hmm ...so they invented Agent Orange to remove the jungle ...

caspian · Post by **caspian** » 09 Dec 2010, 12:40

Lord Beria3 wrote:Regarding the false rape charges, the feminist Naomi Wolf has written a great article on this travesty.

An absolutely pathetic HuffPo piece, and you don't do yourself any favours in repeating it. Do you always dismiss rape claims so lightheartedly? I notice you've utterly failed to provide any proof of your claim that these allegations are false. Disgusting individual.

woodpecker · Post by **woodpecker** » 09 Dec 2010, 12:49

Vortex wrote:I'm not a defeatist. I'm simply pointing out what will probably happen as a result of all this fuss. I don't have to take sides to make a fair guess as to what the reaction of those in power will be.

FWIW I just saw this at the DT site.

Carole Theriault, a senior security consultant at Sophos, a computer security firm, said: "If the big companies weren't locking down their information before, they're definitely doing it now.

Well if they weren't thinking that DDoS was a possibility (and organising their servers and addresses accordingly) up to now, they were clearly half-wits too, and employing the wrong IT staff. DDoS attacks have been going on for years, with many high-profile targets.

Post by **clv101** » 09 Dec 2010, 12:51

There is one aspect to Vortex's argument that has merit. It's certainly technically possible to have a controlled Internet.

The Internet would be nothing without multi-million pound physical infrastructure projects. These facilities are all owned and operated by corporations that HAVE to play by the law. Laws can change, corporations and their infrastructure will then fall in line.