Wikileaks outs gay men and those with HIV in a mass data dump

[La Lioness Priyanka]

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/08/23/wikileaks-outs-gay-people-in-saudi-arabia-in-reckless-mass-data-dump/

Wikileaks has now been accused of carelessly and recklessly publishing unredacted data from Saudi Arabia in a mass info dump, including the personal records of hundreds of people.
Among the thousands of documents, the data released includes the personal information identifying at least one gay man – as well as a number of rape victims and people living with HIV.
It also makes public the identity of domestic workers who had been tortured or sexually abused by their employers – even listing the women’s passport numbers, alongside their full names.

Julian assange really makes me appreciate Edward Snowden, who at least had the decency to filter his information through a journalist. A journalist who could decide what was and was not news that the public needed to know. Assange on the other hand is an insane megalomaniac. I really don't understand how liberals continue to support him.

[KittyWampus]

1. Sorry, no appreciation for Snowden. It becomes more apparent as time goes on he was

either a useful idiot of Putin or a willing accomplice.

And my heart goes out to those who've been outed. Hopefully this does not endanger any of them.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

3. i meant in relative terms not absolute terms. Snowden's release through a journalist

is much more ethical than what Assange has been doing lately.

[spooky3]

17. Another huge difference is the public interest.

Snowden clearly believed what he was doing was necessary to protect people's legitimate interests in privacy. And he had good reason to believe it. His intention was not to harm people but to help them.

Had the US not twisted the arms of friendly nations, Snowden likely would have landed somewhere other than Russia. So I do NOT buy the Putin angle.

In contrast, what possible stake do people in the US have in knowing who may be gay and not "out" in Saudi Arabia, and what harm could have been expected to them in releasing this info?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

18. agreed

[msanthrope]

20. He celebrated his 30th birthday in the Russian embassy in HK. And, in fact, he

does not need a US passport to travel. Snowden chose Russia.

As for Assange--he simply does not care.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

21. not really, snowden chose someone who would not hand him over to the US

i remember that he wanted to go somewhere else (possibly venezuala and couldn't get there)

I am not saying the man is perfect, but I am also saying we are harsh with even legitimate whistle blowers.

[spooky3]

23. Exactly. We (rightly) hail many of them as heroes, but apparently because Snowden's disclosure

led to some legitimate criticism of the Obama administration, we treat him differently.

[msanthrope]

24. He can go to Venezuela. All the Russians need do is provide him

with travel documents and transport. He chose Russia, because they gave him the best deal.

I wonder if he contemplates how fast Pootie-Poot might turn him over to the The Donald.

[scscholar]

51. And why would they give him a deal if he wasn't already doing their bidding?

[spooky3]

22. are you forgetting the requests he made of other governments prior to that point?

[msanthrope]

26. Which other governments? China? They, apparently, were done with him.

He chose where he ended up, chooses to stay, and chooses to be Putin's lackey.

[spooky3]

25. The State Dept. revoked his passport. It DOES matter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/norman-solomon/why-snowdens-passport-mat_b_4150236.html

[msanthrope]

27. And? You don't need an American passport to travel from country to country.

I know. I've done it.

He needs travel documents. Russia could issue him whatever they wished. Has he asked?

[spooky3]

29. The point is that the revocation prevented him from traveling to many countries when it happened.

He did not make a bee-line to Russia to do Putin's bidding.

Please do not move the goalposts.

[msanthrope]

32. It prevented him from travelling to NO country. Let me tell you a little secret

about international travel.

Let's say I'm Snowden. I'm in China. The US cancels my passport. Ok.

Does that mean the Chinese can't let me leave? No.
Does that mean another country can't accept me? No.
Does that mean no other jurisdiction can issue me travel documents? No.

It just means I am no longer travelling under my US passport.

Which I have done. It happens.

[cwydro]

46. How do you travel without a passport?

I'm curious. I've been traveling since I was a child, and I don't know how you can enter another country without a passport.

[msanthrope]

48. It's very simple. The exit country lets you exit, the entering country lets you enter.

Do you think refugees all have passports?

People lose passports, too.

[cwydro]

66. I'm not talking about refugees.

I assume you're not one.

I'm asking what is the process to be allowed to exit or enter without a passport?

[msanthrope]

71. Whatever the exit and entry country decide.

Sovereign countries can do as they wish....it's ludicrous to think Russia, and say, Ecuador, need an American passport to allow Snowden to move.

[cwydro]

73. Well, you said you've done it.

Any reason you can't be specific?

[spooky3]

76. I've done quite a bit of international traveling and have never been permitted entry without a valid

passport. I've even had to endure the super secret special extra security check even though I am anything but a controversial person and benefit from white privilege.

Since Snowden was not a resident of any other country at the time of his crisis, who would have issued travel documents? My guess is that you had residence in at least one other country.

But most importantly, your reply DOES NOT ADDRESS the point others and I were making. Your situation is completely different from Snowden's in that the US government twisted the arms of allies NOT to permit him to enter (without threat of extradition). Unless they did the same in your case, your travel was far less restricted and problematic than Snowden's was.

[msanthrope]

78. Any country is free to issue travel documents to anyone passing through

its confines. Are you suggesting that the Chinese and Russian states were stymied by the lack of an American passport?

Why is extradition a threat? It is a legal process. Mr. Snowden is currently under indictment. Is there some special reason that very special snowflake should not face the law?

[spooky3]

79. No, I am saying Ecuador and several other Latin American and European countries

were pressured by our government to interfere with his travel.

Please find someone else to argue with.

[msanthrope]

80. Please provide proof of that. The United States would not need "pressure"

as we have things like "extradition treaties."

[pnwmom]

65. We don't know what Snowden's ACTUAL intentions were, only his stated intentions.

And they are belied by the fact that he chose to go to China and then take refuge in Russia.

Why didn't he bring his evidence to someone like Bernie Sanders? Or why didn't he go to a different country without an extradition treaty?But China? And then Russia? He should have gone to Ecuador directly if that was his real aim.

[spooky3]

77. Again, please look at the news reports at the time, describing all of the countries who denied

him access, because of pressure by the US government.

Re: your first question, please read the stories about other national security whistleblowers before him who were treated very badly even by respected authorities.

[pnwmom]

81. Ecuador didn't have an extradition treaty, and it was supposedly where he was heading

when he ended up in Russia.

He should have skipped China and gone directly to Ecuador -- no Russian intervention required.

[Brickbat]

2. So freedom. Much progressive. Wow.

[geek tragedy]

4. ASSange is a creature of both the alt-left and the alt-right, but of neither

the decent left nor the principled right.

[snooper2]

5. Assange hates the "West", some on the far left hate the "West", natural friends I guess

[msanthrope]

6. Assange simply doesn't care---he's put people in danger before--it's why the NYT dropped him--

"On Tuesday's Fresh Air, Keller explains why the paper decided to publish the documents, the impact of those cables and why he came to regard Julian Assange as "elusive, manipulative and volatile." Keller tells Terry Gross that during an early conversation with representatives of The Guardian, Assange was told that both The Guardian and The New York Times wanted to edit out the names of ordinary Afghan citizens in classified military documents.

"Assange's reaction was, 'Well, they're informants. There's no reason for protecting them,' " Keller says. "But I think over time, he came around to the view that at least, from a public relations point of view, it was better to allow for a certain amount of editing out of things that could cost lives."

But after the Times published the cables, their relationship with Assange went from "wary to hostile." Assange was upset, Keller says, because the Times would not link to the WikiLeaks website, which did not redact the names of low-level informants.

"Obviously, there was no way we were going to prevent people from going to the WikiLeaks website to see the documents, but as a matter of principle, we said that when we published our stories about the Afghanistan documents, we were not going to link to their website," Keller says. "We feared that it could become hit-list material for the Taliban. was deeply offended, not just that we had not linked to his website, but that we had made a point of not linking to his website. He thought we had shown disrespect."

More at link.

http://www.npr.org/2011/02/01/133277509/times-editor-th...

[La Lioness Priyanka]

14. thanks for linking to this. I think over time assange has gotten really irresponsible

maybe he always was, but i didn't think so when he first started.

[msanthrope]

15. He was always this. But at the time, post-Bush, it was easy to believe that

he was who he says he was.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

16. ugh, is it sad that i do not remember my initial position on Assange? I am generally pro-whistle

blowers, so probably was pro-Assange and pro-Snowden at least to begin with.

[msanthrope]

19. Cryptome, the original leak archive, clued me in very early to this poseur. nt

[JNelson6563]

33. "...no reason for protecting" informants. lolz...

oh the irony!

[msanthrope]

36. Well, they weren't 'his' informants. Although, the way he let Chelsea Manning

down, apparently Assange doesn't treat his informants any better.

[JNelson6563]

39. Isn't he, essentially, an informant too?

Obviously Putin has found him useful, among others.

[msanthrope]

41. I think he's a spoon-fed poseur. Cryptome. nt

[joshcryer]

53. +1

Fucker got Snowden to be imprisoned in Russia, even.

[Hortensis]

72. Seems very likely he is now.

He obviously likes attention and exercise of malice, and principles seem to have nothing to do with it.

[joshcryer]

50. He confessed to the deaths of thousands.

I can't find it but there's an interview where he admits that the Manning files resulted in the deaths of thousands, and he didn't seem all that worked up about it.

[charlyvi]

68. Oh, he also doxed millions of Turkish voters, very dangerous in light of Turkey's political chaos

snip

Journalists and anti-censorship activists who I am in touch with in Turkey have been combing through the leaked documents, and I am not aware of anything “newsworthy” being uncovered. According to the collective searching capacity of long-term activists and journalists in Turkey, none of the “Erdogan emails” appear to be emails actually from Erdogan or his inner circle. Nobody seems to be able to find a smoking gun exposing people in positions of power and responsibility. This doesn’t rule out something eventually emerging, but there have been several days of extensive searching.

However, WikiLeaks also posted links on social media to its millions of followers via multiple channels to a set of leaked massive databases containing sensitive and private information of millions of ordinary people, including a special database of almost all adult women in Turkey.

Yes — this “leak” actually contains spreadsheets of private, sensitive information of what appears to be every female voter in 79 out of 81 provinces in Turkey, including their home addresses and other private information, sometimes including their cellphone numbers. If these women are members of Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party (known as the AKP), the dumped files also contain their Turkish citizenship ID, which increases the risk to them as the ID is used in practicing a range of basic rights and accessing services. The Istanbul file alone contains more than a million women’s private information, and there are 79 files, with most including information of many hundreds of thousands of women.

That’s right.

We are talking about millions of women whose private, personal information has been dumped into the world, with nary an outcry. Their addresses are out there for every stalker, ex-partner, disapproving relative or random crazy to peruse as they wish. And let’s remember that, every year in Turkey, hundreds of women are murdered, most often by current or ex-husbands or boyfriends, and thousands of women leave their homes or go into hiding, seeking safety.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/zeynep-tufekci/wikileaks-erdogan-emails_b_11158792.html

[Person 2713]

7. Fuck Wkileaks when you are dealing with Saudis this can mean death

[FLPanhandle]

8. I'm proud to say that I called Julian a traitorous, lying, little shit from day one.

I took a lot of heat from some here for that stand too.

[ProfessorGAC]

11. His Appearance On Maher Was Dreadful

What an arrogant twit. And, he tried to deflect by bringing up Maher's donation to Obama of a million bucks.

That's not a revelation. Maher did it on arguably the biggest premium channel on earth, live! I couldn't figure out what the point of him bringing it up even was, other than to steer the conversation away from the fact that he was acting like a major tool

[msanthrope]

12. Me, too. I always thought he was a Piece of Shit, Used Car Salesman.

Turns out, I was right.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026388527

[joshcryer]

54. Never been a fan.

His claim to fame was releasing the Manning files, which he got after exploiting a poor soul. I hope Manning never forgets the treachery.

[Avalux]

9. WTF????

There is absolutely no reason to release that information and risk the lives of those poor people. How horrifying.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

10. he's done this before. when he released the DNC documents he released SS numbers

of a bunch of donors. I think he leaked names of afghani informants putting them in the Talibans line of fire.

[msanthrope]

13. Check out my post # 6. nt

[Stellar]

28. " I really don't understand how liberals continue to support him."

and that's the bottom line!

[yardwork]

30. People will be murdered because of this.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

31. without a doubt.

[tonyt53]

34. And for the people that though Assange was a hero - he is a rapist with revenge on his mind.

He is going to try to hurt as many people as he can.

[shenmue]

35. This could get people killed

[relayerbob]

37. When is Anonymous

going to shut this creep down?

[Orrex]

38. The pig Assange is truly vile

Setting aside for the moment his own considerable fondness for rape, he postures himself as a warrior of truth, exposing secrets to the light of day. But he's selective in his choice of targets and is clearly pursuing an agenda, making him a two-bit propagandist.

[Warpy]

40. He doesn't micromanage what goes through Wikileaks

Data dumps are delivered anonymously and published without review, as I understand it.

Very few people have access to sensitive, sexually charged data like HIV treatment history and personal data for rape victims.

I smell a very large rat here.

Cui bono?

[randome]

45. Yet he wants everyone to believe that he is in charge of Wikileaks.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[msanthrope]

49. Why doesn't he? It's not like he hasn't got the time. nt

[Warpy]

52. He didn't set it up that way

He wanted it to be a site where whistleblowers could get information out there without having their information parsed or being threatened with retaliation.

Something smells very bad here with these "leaks."

[msanthrope]

57. Funny....that site already existed, and threw his poseur ass off. nt

[La Lioness Priyanka]

87. These irresponsible leaks are very much in keeping with his MO

He's not an empathetic man.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

58. if you are implying that he was set up with these leaks, i dont think so

he is incredibly irresponsible about how he leaks info and who it damages. The DNC leaks had SS numbers attached for donors. He leaked names of Afghani low level informants, knowing that the taliban would come after them. This is completely in keeping with his nature.

[Blue_Tires]

84. He certainly loves hogging all the credit

I'd have thought he would have been distancing himself from the doxxing of teenage rape victims, and firing those responsible...

So far, I haven't heard a peep from him on Twitter today, aside from him whoring the hell out of the latest Vince Foster conspiracy theory...

[Politicub]

42. Fuck - this is a human rights violation

And needs to be treated as such.

[ismnotwasm]

43. He's a godammned fucked up piece of shit

It doesn't take more than a hours research to discover that he just doesn't care--and he's never protected his sources adequately

This has me furious.

[lark]

44. After he went along with the Russian theft and published their stolen and ALTERED emails,

they are dead to me. They said they hacked the repugs emails too, well where the hell are they? Funny, those didn't get the same upfront treatment that Hillary's emails did. Assholes have sold their soul to the devil and will pay for their treachery. Snowden is way above their class, he cares about the country, they are trying to destroy it.

[judesedit]

47. I didn't even read it. I think it's shameful. Why would anyone support Assange????

[Agnosticsherbet]

55. Julian Asange is a Narcissistic asswipe, more like Trump

Than anything else.

[etherealtruth]

59. Agree completely n/t

[fleabiscuit]

56. Again, what a surprise that a criminal organization acts like dooshes. And some lap it up. eom

[wryter2000]

60. Uneffingbelievable

Real crusader for justice and freedom that one.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

61. Assange and his followers think he has so much power.

And that he is being persecuted for political reasons. Another regular Jesus Christ, jesus christ!

[George II]

62. How low can and will wikileaks go?

[rtracey]

63. POS

Assange is a piece of shit. He thinks his shit dump of a website is helping, its not. He is just as arrogant as Trump. I hope he rots his ass in that Ecuadorian embassy/prison.

[Blue_Tires]

64. Yeah, they went from a transparency org to a doxxing org awhile ago...

Last edited Tue Aug 23, 2016, 02:42 PM - Edit history (1)

Congratulations, Assange...

You've just signed the death warrants of a bunch of GLBT Saudis

[Historic NY]

67. They kill people over there.

[tammywammy]

69. Holy shit.

You have to posses absolutely no morals, ethics or empathy to publish information of people that will absolutely be murdered for it - gay people in a country that will stone them to death.

[Lee-Lee]

70. If you read Assanges essays he essentially believes there should be no government secrets at all.

He sees any type of government that holds any information at all away from the public as an evil conspiracy.

He makes no differentiation between dictatorships or democracies, conservative or liberal, or anything else. He sees any type of governmental secret as a conspiracy against the people.

So he will leak anything and everything he goes his hands on, and doesn't care the consequences because he believes that any bad consequences are that of bad government and government secrets, not of his leaks.

[Blue_Tires]

74. Which is of course his reason for dumping all those Sony e-mails

Last edited Tue Aug 23, 2016, 05:01 PM - Edit history (1)

and last I checked, the DNC doesn't count as "the government", either

Why does a transparency crusade have to dox so many private people on the low end of the totem pole?

Did you miss the part about doxxing teenage rape victims??

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/b70da83fd111496dbdf015acbb7987fb/private-lives-are-exposed-wikileaks-spills-its-secrets

[randome]

75. He's a cheap, big-mouthed fence for stolen goods and he will never be anything else.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[Dreamer Tatum]

82. And when he could do no wrong, a lot of DUers agreed. nt

[backscatter712]

83. Yeah, Wikileaks has lost my respect. n/t

[awoke_in_2003]

85. Being anti-Semitic wasn't enough

He had to add "homophobe" to his résumé. I can't believe that I defended this asshat.

[Tarheel_Dem]

86. They're not "liberals", but they've successfully infiltrated. n/t