so the question was “Do you think the “wikileaks” gawker attacks were a set up?”
I think this is at least partially a set up to force there version of the netnutrality bill which has NOTHING to do with netnutrality. further more it takes the eyes off the actual coulperate in this case Manning, a member of the military that was given top secret status then for months was “leaking” documents to wikileaks . ..How did the US Military NOT know he was accessing these things for months ?
is there a deeper scheme here?
why were there not flags that tell you when things are being accessed?
you would think there would be a permissions group set up on “need to know” cables .
another thing of note. it was not wikileaks that leaked troop positions . they haven’t been around that long ,. that was CNN, also a lot of history in these matters seems to be being rewritten to cover peoples asses
so far we do not know if it was the US government (via mercenary hackers) that hacked Gawker or the Pro-Wikileaks hackers. (don’t think it doesn’t happen)
same lie they told about the Visa and master card denial of service attack. to me it seems more media postering then factual. all that does is make it imposable to log on, it doesn’t itself steal any data . again not saying I condone it. but i’d rather people understand what something actually is instead of attributing it powers it doesn’t actually have by itself .
Also point being Gawker was using NO security and transparent password lists ie: text files .
let that be a lesson to why you use encoded lists .
better articles are those Flagged by Jeff Moss on BOTH parties have been using strong armed tactics and mafia like application of Mob law.
http://twitter.com/thedarktangent
http://www.redbarn.org/blogs/vixie/ruleoflaw
