Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
> Am 15.04.2019 um 14:04 schrieb podinski : > > I was hoping more women might weigh in here... ( with all the possible > anger flying from the personal life scandal loops ... and there is one > potent feminist angle that seems more unavoidable than others ... That > if the US extradition now takes priority over the 7 year brouhaha of > Sweden's supposed case, then it displays a extra patriarchal > discrimination, from all those who believed in it, or at least pretended > to. ) Oh Paolo…seriously? Projecting onto women that solely personal emotions Are the reason for them to potentially raise their voices? And euphemizing sexist Experiences as their own „life scandal loops“? And actually believing women are Only interested in „women’s topics“ / justice for women in this very ambivalent and Complex equation that women are very well able to see at least as differentiated As men do? Just a hint, what I have recently heard what women are actually very selflessly Concerned about was rather - That sexism and narcissism are still the most underrated security vulnerabilities - That anyone still trying to ignore that and blame it on the victims instead is actively hurting press freedom and the fight against a surveillance state - That democracy and the daily fight for restoring it cannot afford men anymore in endangered positions who have only stone age social and gender expertise - That personality cult results in loss of contact with reality and inability of acceptance of criticism in the hyped person so that the most symbolic person of a movement is most likely to become its weakest point - That it doesn’t take a narcissist to kill a narcissist but just a book of the same name - That a legal system that enables the abuse of smaller complaints like those about sexist assaults as easy entry for the prosecution of more severe indictable offences is actually hurting women’s rights and the cause for more justice for women, as it has a chilling effect for the decision to call the police when actually needed Freedom for the whistleblowers, yes. But NO to „being targeted“ as a new excuse for blatant sexism and victim blaming. N # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
Hi all, and Thx Molly for your post! I was hoping more women might weigh in here... ( with all the possible anger flying from the personal life scandal loops ... and there is one potent feminist angle that seems more unavoidable than others ... That if the US extradition now takes priority over the 7 year brouhaha of Sweden's supposed case, then it displays a extra patriarchal discrimination, from all those who believed in it, or at least pretended to. ) And your post hit on some key points + good focus ... for me... Namely that analogy to Mai Lai... and the fact that any new media tactics will have to consider that Truth Exposed does not quite have the same value/ bang ( in the over-mediated predicaments of cyber-spaced orbits ) and is NOT effectively disrupting the warmongers and those upper tiers of power so much. Which also makes me wonder about the value of high tech imagery vs. up-close analogue-made pictures dripping in technicolor blood... nor the stench of burning bodies ( not that Life Mag outlet could or would do much with that, there were at least reporters then on-the -ground who were probably permanently changed by the experiences )... Thus, something to say here about the cold distance of the hyper-technical reach + medium ! That grainy b/w camera shot from over a kilometer away And one might even take time to analyze the fact that Assange himself had now been reduced to trading bits on screens, like a stock trader sitting in front of multiple screens. ... which might say something here about his later "cubicle-politics" and his decision to deal in only DNC dirt. (?) ... But before i digress into all the possible complaints + nitpickings of how the later-JA maneuvered in a very cornered and compromised state... We DO want to focus on solidarity for journalists and/or straight-up (h)activists + protest ! And so the XLterrestrials have been compiling a little XLT guide of resources V.1 ... ( work-in-progress ) ... in order to stay focused on the most urgent issues ! The XLt Guide to JA’s Arrest + WikiLeaks + War Crimes http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19054 ... It's sad to see even in my own circles a heavy + depressing polarization... around Assange + WL ... And so i am grateful for Nettime discussions to stay above the lower frays... that mass+social media loves to pour gasoline on ... ( afterall those corporate channels are still richly pumped by the Oiligarchies ) ... Much more to say, but for now... will leave it at that... Respex ! Podinski On 4/13/19 12:20 AM, nettime-l-requ...@mail.kein.org wrote: > > -- > > Message: 5 > Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2019 15:20:05 -0700 > From: Molly Hankwitz > To: tbyfield > Cc: Morlock Elloi , a moderated mailing list > for net criticism > Subject: Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Dear ted, Morlock, nettimers on Julian Assange, > > I'm weighing in - after yesterday - a very cold/chilling day on our > Internet. > > What power wants is the Internet itself. Duh! And western industrialized > UK/USA > are working together to secure the First World...a world of make-believe > "dreams" that ought to come true as long as there is no critical outside > which is what Wikileaks and Julian Assange have provided as journalists, > other journalists with! Neo-liberal paradigms have longed taught that all > we need to keep the peace are some candy-coated reform jobs and slicked up > "events' where everything is cool and politely handled. > > What the arrest of Julian Assange is, is yet another event in a long line > of arrests of journalists and dissenters in the last decade as this new era > of billionaire power and social control (of the Internet?) sets in. One of > the biggest effects has been the effort to censor the Internet! What was > it *before*...baby of the DOD? Well, it is still baby of the DOD and don't > anyone forget it. PRISM. If only the power to communicate from our laptops > could be stopped, or at least threatened or controlled or commodified or > market driven or interrupted or overpriced. If only the FCC and Congress > and the EU could secure all that mental labor out there and all the dissent > and all the potential data; could read and secure it all. What Julian > Assange represents, and what power and control would go so far as to > concoct and "conjure" about this mysterious hair-dying feral otherness > brain-child of computing he is, is that Assange is someone who has had the > guts to live in the space of a person who is not under "social" control. > Yes, in an embassy with a little balcony. Juliet Assange, effeminate, and > soft spoken. (Ecuadorian pres, art of deal, Julian token of exchange in > right-wing deal)
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
I agree Assange's impact has been immense, but that kind of heroic model is a counterproductive way of thinking about Assange and his contributions. If anything, the distinctive (maybe even decisive) feature of the last decade was its lack of heroes and the growing sense that we're enmeshed in tangled and collapsing systems. I often see this system vs. heroes argument, and if you look at my infrastructure rants, I generally support the 'systemic' approach and denigrate 'heroes'. But who creates the proper systemic approach, as opposed to the present one? The 'system' more often than not turns into ecosystem of cowards, leeches and opportunistic parasites, and nothing, *nothing* ever comes out of it. So we are back to the necessity of heroes and martyrs, and if you look back in the recorded history, nothing happened without them. The cycle is then: corrupt system -> hero/martyr -> better system -> actual change. Assange's efforts may become visible long after he is neutralized. But he is a required component. As for the theory, look up his paper on how elites organize and how it can be disrupted. I think it's a general mistake to classify Wikileaks as the new journalism model. Journalism is part of the system and journalists are prostitutes. Wikileaks is about actual disruption of elites, which journalism sometimes accidentally or incidentally does. While calling them publishers is convenient in the legal battle, it has a side effect of masking what they actually do. This is what makes the case interesting: everyone that matters knows what Wikileaks is really about, yet it has to be narrated through this silly cover. Similar to Cryptome - where JY has to put up a balanced front of a runaway mind in order not to be carried away by neither TLA nor people in white. In the end, it's all about who will you be carried away by. # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
On 11 Apr 2019, at 14:18, Morlock Elloi wrote:
OK, let's look at it from another angle: who did, in the last 10
years, change public discourse in the desirable (to me at least) way
more than Wikileaks and its staff? Suntanned POTUS? Pope? Habermas?
Mother Theresa? Dalai Lama? Zizek? Beyonce? nettime?
I agree Assange's impact has been immense, but that kind of heroic model
is a counterproductive way of thinking about Assange and his
contributions. If anything, the distinctive (maybe even decisive)
feature of the last decade was its lack of heroes and the growing sense
that we're enmeshed in tangled and collapsing systems.
In effect, you're asking the kind of question that the editors of Time
magazine would pose in naming a Person of the Year. That annual ritual
was a central feature of Henry Luce's efforts to project an American
Century: in the face of the growing challenge posed by socialism and all
its messy masses, he drew on a nostalgic model of history ('great men,
battles, and speeches,' as they say) to propose a sort of
philosopher-scientist-king to tickle the fancy of the Washington–New
York consensus. But Wikileaks's most significant actions — Cablegate,
Collateral Murder, etc — were aimed precisely *at* the military and
diplomatic aspects of that US hegemony. And that was and remains
Assange's plight: on the one hand, he wanted to bring down the world
modeled on US hegemony, on the other, he wanted to be the kind of
anti/hero it relied on.
Note, FWIW, the cover story of _The Atlantic_, to the extent that that
former monthly has a cover anymore (YA network effect): 'The End of the
American Century.'
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/end-of-the-american-century/514526/
And note as well Forensic Architecture's statement, which sounds a lot
like something Time magazine would write: Wikileaks 'shattered every
established paradigm of public interest journalism, and ushered in a new
era of investigative reporting.'
https://www.forensic-architecture.org/statement-from-forensic-architecture-on-the-arrest-of-julian-assange/
Like I said, we can think critically about Assange — and acknowledge
his formidable contributions — without lapsing into that kind of
rhetoric. He didn't shatter any paradigms of public-interest
journalism: he bundled together a lot of conventional networky ideas —
about leaky secrets, about enabling direct access to primary sources,
about the expansive capacity of hard drives rather than the limited
space of print news, about the role of security in protecting sources
— and wrapped them in an effective (ugh) 'brand.' That was really
important, and project like ProPublica and the sprawling collaborations
surrounding the Panama Papers etc owe him a big debt.
The important thing to understand why is Wikileaks considered such
danger: unlike impotent philosophiles, left, right and progressives,
Wikileaks uses effective technological tools. Which is why it is
universally hated. You are supposed to only pretend to be effecting
change.
That's the dream of Wikileaks. The reality is that the 'organization'
spent much of the last several years squandering its credibility and
becoming an increasingly threadbare cover for Assange's cryptic designs.
Again, that's not intended as a criticism of *him*. The fact that he
remained at liberty, or at least not imprisoned forever, and more sane
than not through all this is a testament to some sort of strength. It'd
be easy to see what I say as the usual 'moderate' bending with the wind,
but it isn't: I was clear-eyed about him ~25 years ago when he was
banging on about 'rubber hose' cryptography, and I'm
clear-eyed about him now. And YMMV, but I think it's also clear-eyed to
recognize that overly effusive statements now will fall prey to the same
old cycle of coverage that will make him yesterday's news when, as his
many trials drag on, he'll need a more sustained kind of respect. So:
Make no mistake - it's not about Assange or anyone else - it's about
two simple technical facts:
1. Wikileaks servers could not be suppressed neither by rubberhosing
service providers, registrars, nor telecoms. They did try, for a long
time. If they could, none of this would happen.
2. Wikileaks sources were far better protected than anyone else's (and
still are) by using custom submission technology.
#1 and #2 is what put rope around Assange's neck. Use of tools.
Wikileaks works. Effective use of technology cannot be allowed, and an
example needs to be set. Tweeting and blogging on corporate servers is
OK.
I agree, but as long as he's alive it does need to remain, in part,
about Assange. Do I really need to argue why?
Cheers,
Ted
# distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D351_3qWwAEkMXt.jpg Now watch the sad show of British and their judicial system as they bend # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
The bluring of the Swedish allegations and request for extradition and the US request for allegations have proved a useful smoke screen for the authorities. This deliberate bluring makes it particularly important that we don’t add to the fog by eliding all the allegations into one conspiritorial box.. IMHO it means keeping the Swedish and US allegations separate and not assuming that we know who is conspiring with whom and why. However In the midst of yesterday’s fog of misinformation and political posturing one fact stands out The Swedes do not seem to have been informed in advance of arrest. The Swedish prosecutor expressed surprise and were unprepared. Whatever US and Ecuador knew in advance, Sweden does not appear to have been in the loop https://news.cision.com/aklagarmyndigheten/r/statement-regarding-media-information-on-arrest-in-london,c2786974 Whereas the US authorities had clrearly been well prepped. We should not assume that the Swedish allegations are a groundless fabrication. The was a request for extradition in 2010 but Assange jumped bail but the request was left outstanding until 2017 when it was dropped despite the prosecutor believing there was a case to answer. Yesterday after Assange’s evicton and arrest the request, the Swedish prosecuting body has now confirmed it is reviewing whether to resume the investigation and thereby renew its extradition request. https://news.cision.com/aklagarmyndigheten/r/update-in-the-assange-case,c2787466 Sweden may be less of a stooge for US ambitions than the UK (who is desperate to please the US as they imagine that it offers a solid alliance economic and geo-political alliance post-brexit). David Garcia On 12 Apr 2019, at 01:58, Morlock Elloi wrote: > The principal sin is that Wikileaks undermined (by explicitly exposing > crimes) the wide spread belief among subjects of modern states: "it is OK for > my state/party to behave criminally, because I benefit from it, as long as > they keep it quiet". This is the unpardonable offense. > > If documenting crimes requires "super-empowered individual" it just means > that criminals are expending enormous efforts to hide them. > > >> Assange (and Wikileaks) has become a prime example of what military >> theorist in the early 00s called a "super-empowered individual" capable >> of marshaling technology and resources available to non-sate actors to > > # distributed via : no commercial use without permission > #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org > # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
The principal sin is that Wikileaks undermined (by explicitly exposing crimes) the wide spread belief among subjects of modern states: "it is OK for my state/party to behave criminally, because I benefit from it, as long as they keep it quiet". This is the unpardonable offense. If documenting crimes requires "super-empowered individual" it just means that criminals are expending enormous efforts to hide them. Assange (and Wikileaks) has become a prime example of what military theorist in the early 00s called a "super-empowered individual" capable of marshaling technology and resources available to non-sate actors to # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
On 11.04.19 20:18, Morlock Elloi wrote: > > 1. Wikileaks servers could not be suppressed neither by rubberhosing > service providers, registrars, nor telecoms. They did try, for a > long time. If they could, none of this would happen. > > 2. Wikileaks sources were far better protected than anyone else's > (and still are) by using custom submission technology. > > #1 and #2 is what put rope around Assange's neck. Use of tools. > Wikileaks works. Effective use of technology cannot be allowed, and > an example needs to be set. Tweeting and blogging on corporate > servers is OK. Assange (and Wikileaks) has become a prime example of what military theorist in the early 00s called a "super-empowered individual" capable of marshaling technology and resources available to non-sate actors to attack what they called a "systempunkt", meaning a node of a complex systems whose failure would set of a cascade of events. That much was clear early on: http://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/contain-leaks-whistle-blowers-and-networked-news-ecology Yes, in order to become super empowered, tools are necessary, but they don't need to be super sophisticated. These ideas where originally developed to describe Bin Laden and what made him super-empowered were followers willing with box cutters and rudimentary aviation training. Assange is a hacker, so he used hacker tools, which are particularly close to the operating logic of today's apparatuses of power. It's quite a testimony of Assange's resourcefulness and willpower how long was able to keep it up. It's very rare for non-state actors to openly challenge powerful nation states and survive. Anyway, there will be others who figure out system and how to effect maximum impact (cascades) with minimal resources. That's in the nature of complex, open systems. Felix -- http://felix.openflows.com |Open PGP http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=0x0bbb5b950c9ff2ac signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
Assange masterfully seduced the press, in that way presaged Trump's
bountiful curative to a dying paper-profession unable to overcome
online challenges, WikiLeaks was little noticed from October 2006
founding until Collateral Murder was staged in April 2010 (at the
National Press Club, where else?). Then Manning's gushing, then a
sustained dramaturgy of Swedish pecadillos, then
Snowden/Greenwald/Poitras/Guardian/WaPo's careful teasing, redacting,
withholding ("not dumping like WikiLeaks").
Assange's celebrity (Pamela Anderson, Wei Wei, ad nauseum) arrest
extends an arc from Gawker's pansexual predatory excess to DJT's
blow-dried sexculpation, to resurgence of top-down leadership of
MeToo, Blackish, innumerable 2020 candidacies, the 99%, privacy and
comsec advocates, all susceptible to being overwhelmed by
rule-breaking gender and racial disintegration. Assange's dominant
male whiteness not so different from Greenwald's Brazilian racism.
Presumbably Trump will pardon Assange along with his Barr-blessed
hoodlums but not before feeding the media with prolonged advertising,
yarping heads, febrile criticism, abhorrent violence. Assange better
watch his unasylumed ass against a one-off fame seeker with a banned
firearm, not least a former colleague/lover/influencer.
# distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
not the most urgen question, but still: does anybody understand or saw a proper explanation of why RT's proxy agency was the only crew filming? (RT's explanation, that they are the last professionals left I've seen) # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
Ecuador changed government. Old government's networks of cream skimming were focused on China. New government wants to establish its own flows of cash corruption, so they return to the old sugar daddy, USA. Getting back in to favourable trade relations costs some thing. Assange is a thing. Simple transaction and it makes for better relations with little brexit brother, too. Win-win-win. On 11/04/2019 17:03, tbyfield wrote: > So far, coverage has understandably focused on the event of Assange's > arrest. Lots of voices are arguing that it's 'chilling' — as if keeping > someone jailed other names for six+ years in a forlorn and ambiguous > situation weren't chilling. If anything, the indefinite uncertainty of > his semi-voluntary confinement was even more chilling; and the fact that > it had to end in something like this, but no one knew when or why, made > it even more so. > > Most of the comments I've seen so far feel like they were pulled out of > the freezer to thaw it out for dinnertime news programs: he's an > Australian citizen, he had immunity, Wikileaks isn't a US entity, the > embassy is Ecuador's sovereign territory, etc, etc. These conditions > were all true give days ago, five weeks ago, even five years ago, so > they don't add much to understanding what's afoot right now. A better > line of questions might involve what's changed since he first entered > the embassy. Most of what we 'know' amounts to tea-leaf reading — for > example, Manning being jailed for refusing to testify before a grand > jury, and the Wikileaks tweet several days ago that he'd be arrested > within 'hours, or days,' or something like that. Beyond those scattered > crumbs, I think it depends on where you stand on 'conspiratorial' ideas > — like how this might related to the trajectory of Mueller's report. > > But a myriad of other, 'softer' things has changed in a big way. When > Assange and Wikileaks rose to power, if you could call it that, the US > relied heavily on extraordinary rendition to move ill-defined 'enemy > combatants' from secret to secret — 'torture taxi' private jets and > 'black sites.' TIRED. What's WIRED is the US brazenly subjecting vast > numbers of undocumented newcomers to detention and family-separation > policies. And whatever you think of Glenn Greenwald, he was a bit > fresher when this Wikileaks thing was starting up; now Greenwald is > buried in ossified complaints that his views are hopelessly compromised > and ridiculously selective. A few generations of dodgy messaging apps > have been tossed in the dustbin of internet history and, among them, > Signal has become a way of signaling a certain savvy. And, as Felix > points out, Wikileaks's basic proposition — secure drops of confidential > data for journalists — has become so normy that some news outlets have > already retired their systems. Basically, security isn't 'sexy' anymore. > And neither is Assange. > > The fact that this arrest was conducted not just in the open but in > broad daylight can't be ignored — and nor can the way he was > half-hustled, half-carried out. It seems like the intent was to present > him in the most bedraggled, infirm way in order to strip him of as much > dignity as possible. And it also seems like Assange knew that. It's > possible he just happened to be so engrossed in Gore Vidal's _History of > the National Security State_ that he didn't think much of it when a > police truck pulled up and a dozen officers poured through the embassy's > door — and that the head officer said, 'Fine, sure, waiting can be > boring — why not bring some light reading?' But police tend to be > cautious about letting arrestees carry loose possessions, so it's more > likely that there was a bit of coordinated choreography there: that > Assange chose a book whose cover would be identifiable in even the > crappiest video footage, and that the police, who surely handcuffed him, > nevertheless allowed him the odd privilege of making some mute comment. > But prisoners of conscience brandishing 'significant' books as they move > through public settings has become a bit of a thing in the past few > years, which suggests that some police forces have developed procedures > for distinguishing free speech from blunt weapons. > > As obvious as it may seem, it's also worth noting that the Ecuadorians > didn't just push him out the door and leave him sitting on the steps > with boxes of his possessions. In a way, I'm surprised they didn't. > Where could he have gone that he couldn't be apprehended on the way? > Maybe that would have been to shambolic or, however improbably, too > risky. Whatever the case, Ecuador chose to do it deliberately by > allowing seemingly normal police to enter the premises (though I'd wager > they'll be doing a pretty thorough security sweep to make sure the > visitors didn't leave any presents behind). From now now, Assange will > be moved from one rigorously specified setting to another: holding > cells,
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
*Semi*-voluntary is just a statement of fact, not an evaluation: he had more choices than someone entirely in custody. None of those choices were good, and, like I said, I don't think any of them could have changed this outcome — that, sooner or later, he'd be physically removed from the embassy. A certain measure of normalization is inevitable: there are kids who were born after Assange entered the embassy but know his name. I think the issue is what *kind* of normalization. As Felix and you both point out, albeit in very different ways, the widespread adoption of Wikileaks's basic vocabulary — both as ways of working and as historical context — is another form. You give Assange more credit than he's due for changing public discourse, I think. The exposure of classified military and diplomatic materials has been going on for half a century or more, and there are organizations — say, the National Security Archive in the US, and other entities in other countries — that have been actively working in a sort of proto-Wikileaks 'space' for decades. If anything, the more promising aspect of Wikileaks wasn't the leaks, it was the wiki — the hope that leaking could become pervasive and transformative (I'm tempted to say, *be normalized*). I'd argue that Assange himself turned out to be one of the greatest obstacles to that hope. But, as absurd as it may sound, I don't say any of this to diminish his impact or to diss him: the best respect is to think carefully about what he *did* accomplish. I tried to get at some of this several years ago, in point/counterpoint piece with Florian Cramer that Mute ~commissioned in 2011: http://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/wikileaks-has-radically-altered-military-diplomatic-information-complex-%E2%80%93-10-reasons-and-against Cheers, Ted On 11 Apr 2019, at 13:02, Morlock Elloi wrote: What was the voluntary part? Lifelong imprisonment in the US or execution are viable alternatives? The amount of normalization is staggering. And it works. From left-talk about revelations of criminal election rigging being far bigger crime than the criminal rigging itself (cretins on the left still believe it, also that Assange is a rapist), to forgetting how Wikileaks profoundly changed the public discourse (cables, war logs, collateral murder, vault, etc etc.) how it saved Snowden from chains, how it enabled effective whistleblowing. And it is enabled mainly by cretins on the left living in psychotic denial of reality. Now watch the sad show of British and their judicial system as they bend over to receive the final ejaculation ... state-size necrophilia. semi-voluntary confinement <...> # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
There is no such thing as "Swedish request for extradition" - this is fact that is easily checked. He was never charged. The case was dropped. It was manufactured attempt by US to snatch him. It's really depressing how effective the propaganda is. Now repeat: There is no such thing as "Swedish request for extradition". There is no such thing as "Swedish request for extradition" There is no such thing as "Swedish request for extradition" They say that repetition works for decontamination as well. But there is hope - idiots obsessing how Assange "inserted bare dick into vulnerable female" are quiet these days. On 4/11/19, 10:24, David Garcia wrote: Given the nature of the allegations agree to Swedish request for extradition. # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
Given the nature of the allegations agree to Swedish request for extradition. But refuse extradition to US for allegations related to publishing activities. On 11 Apr 2019, at 18:02, Morlock Elloi wrote: > What was the voluntary part? Lifelong imprisonment in the US or execution are > viable alternatives? > > The amount of normalization is staggering. And it works. > > From left-talk about revelations of criminal election rigging being far > bigger crime than the criminal rigging itself (cretins on the left still > believe it, also that Assange is a rapist), to forgetting how Wikileaks > profoundly changed the public discourse (cables, war logs, collateral murder, > vault, etc etc.) how it saved Snowden from chains, how it enabled effective > whistleblowing. > > And it is enabled mainly by cretins on the left living in psychotic denial of > reality. > > Now watch the sad show of British and their judicial system as they bend over > to receive the final ejaculation ... state-size necrophilia. > >> semi-voluntary confinement > > # distributed via : no commercial use without permission > #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org > # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest/Internet archives
On 2019-04-11 19:01, newme...@aol.com wrote: It is "Five Eyes" who are now trying to crack down on the Internet -- as reflected in the communiques coming from their last meeting in Australia. "Regulation" of Facebook is also likely to be based on their plans -- as reflected in recent sweeping "take-down" notices to the Internet Archive and others for hosting "terrorist" materials. This, to me, is the most frightening part of newmedia's posting: now for erasing history - this would be pure 1984, and indeed one of the many, painful 'ends of the Internet' ... https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/11/18305968/eu-internet-terrorist-content-takedown-mistakes-internet-archive-org https://blog.archive.org/2019/04/10/official-eu-agencies-falsely-report-more-than-550-archive-org-urls-as-terrorist-content/ We all can go to sleep now ... p=2D! # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
Ted : > A better line of questions might involve what's changed since he > first >entered the embassy. A better line of questions involves what's changed in the last few weeks . . . !! What is now in motion is the investigate-the-investigators phase of the "soft coup" against Trump. At the center of that coup was "Five Eyes" -- which is to say, the same people who arrested Assange. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes Indeed, Trump's "relationship" with Russia -- particularly including one-on-one meetings with Putin -- has his opposition to "Five Eyes" written all over it. Who knows more about British Intelligence than the Russians (and once the Soviets)? It is "Five Eyes" who are now trying to crack down on the Internet -- as reflected in the communiques coming from their last meeting in Australia. "Regulation" of Facebook is also likely to be based on their plans -- as reflected in recent sweeping "take-down" notices to the Internet Archive and others for hosting "terrorist" materials. Now Assange is in "Five Eyes" custody. It would seem that is the "game afoot" which is both quite fresh and in need of some careful analysis. Mark StahlmanJersey City Heights# distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
So far, coverage has understandably focused on the event of Assange's arrest. Lots of voices are arguing that it's 'chilling' — as if keeping someone jailed other names for six+ years in a forlorn and ambiguous situation weren't chilling. If anything, the indefinite uncertainty of his semi-voluntary confinement was even more chilling; and the fact that it had to end in something like this, but no one knew when or why, made it even more so. Most of the comments I've seen so far feel like they were pulled out of the freezer to thaw it out for dinnertime news programs: he's an Australian citizen, he had immunity, Wikileaks isn't a US entity, the embassy is Ecuador's sovereign territory, etc, etc. These conditions were all true give days ago, five weeks ago, even five years ago, so they don't add much to understanding what's afoot right now. A better line of questions might involve what's changed since he first entered the embassy. Most of what we 'know' amounts to tea-leaf reading — for example, Manning being jailed for refusing to testify before a grand jury, and the Wikileaks tweet several days ago that he'd be arrested within 'hours, or days,' or something like that. Beyond those scattered crumbs, I think it depends on where you stand on 'conspiratorial' ideas — like how this might related to the trajectory of Mueller's report. But a myriad of other, 'softer' things has changed in a big way. When Assange and Wikileaks rose to power, if you could call it that, the US relied heavily on extraordinary rendition to move ill-defined 'enemy combatants' from secret to secret — 'torture taxi' private jets and 'black sites.' TIRED. What's WIRED is the US brazenly subjecting vast numbers of undocumented newcomers to detention and family-separation policies. And whatever you think of Glenn Greenwald, he was a bit fresher when this Wikileaks thing was starting up; now Greenwald is buried in ossified complaints that his views are hopelessly compromised and ridiculously selective. A few generations of dodgy messaging apps have been tossed in the dustbin of internet history and, among them, Signal has become a way of signaling a certain savvy. And, as Felix points out, Wikileaks's basic proposition — secure drops of confidential data for journalists — has become so normy that some news outlets have already retired their systems. Basically, security isn't 'sexy' anymore. And neither is Assange. The fact that this arrest was conducted not just in the open but in broad daylight can't be ignored — and nor can the way he was half-hustled, half-carried out. It seems like the intent was to present him in the most bedraggled, infirm way in order to strip him of as much dignity as possible. And it also seems like Assange knew that. It's possible he just happened to be so engrossed in Gore Vidal's _History of the National Security State_ that he didn't think much of it when a police truck pulled up and a dozen officers poured through the embassy's door — and that the head officer said, 'Fine, sure, waiting can be boring — why not bring some light reading?' But police tend to be cautious about letting arrestees carry loose possessions, so it's more likely that there was a bit of coordinated choreography there: that Assange chose a book whose cover would be identifiable in even the crappiest video footage, and that the police, who surely handcuffed him, nevertheless allowed him the odd privilege of making some mute comment. But prisoners of conscience brandishing 'significant' books as they move through public settings has become a bit of a thing in the past few years, which suggests that some police forces have developed procedures for distinguishing free speech from blunt weapons. As obvious as it may seem, it's also worth noting that the Ecuadorians didn't just push him out the door and leave him sitting on the steps with boxes of his possessions. In a way, I'm surprised they didn't. Where could he have gone that he couldn't be apprehended on the way? Maybe that would have been to shambolic or, however improbably, too risky. Whatever the case, Ecuador chose to do it deliberately by allowing seemingly normal police to enter the premises (though I'd wager they'll be doing a pretty thorough security sweep to make sure the visitors didn't leave any presents behind). From now now, Assange will be moved from one rigorously specified setting to another: holding cells, secure transport, interrogation rooms, courtrooms. The big question, which drove these events from the beginning, is *which* ones? A few in the UK, then almost certainly in Sweden, then almost as certainly in the US. I don't think anyone seriously believes this odyssey will be driven by a strictly limited questions about the details of his relations with a few women and (as the NYT puts it) 'a single charge [of] conspiracy to commit computer intrusion.' While Mueller's team 'interviewed' a
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
Democracy Now is doing interviews on this, which you can access via their twitter feed. https://twitter.com/democracynow/status/1116320933977841664/video/1 and there, Glenn Greenwald makes the point that Assange is neither US citizen, nor is Wikileaks a US-based news organization, thus "the idea that the U.S. government can just extend its reach to any news outlet anywhere in the world and criminalize publication of documents … is extremely chilling." For Trump, it poses an odd political problem, because Assange is a real hero to this base. I scrolled through the comments on Breitbart, and the were all really positive about him, and saw is arrest as the works of the "globalist" deep state. Even if you don't like his dealings with Trump and would like to see him properly prosecuted for his alleged rape in Sweden, I think Greenwald's point is still the core one. Besides the specific content of the leaks that came out of Wikileaks, I think Assange has been the most innovative person in journalism, and particularly the print media owe him a lot of thanks for pioneering a model (research pools, database investigation, data journalism beyond graphic design etc) that made them more relevant again. All the best. Felix On 11.04.19 14:32, Patrice Riemens wrote: > On 2019-04-11 13:16, John Young wrote: >> New TV link of Assange arrest: >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stTMt1tLT4g > > > There are already 3 pages of minute-by-minute reporting on the arrest, > pbly m few more to come: > > https://www.theguardian.com/media/live/2019/apr/11/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-arrested-at-the-ecuadorean-embassy-live-updates > > # distributed via : no commercial use without permission > # is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org > # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: > -- http://felix.openflows.com |Open PGP http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=0x0bbb5b950c9ff2ac signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Guardian Live on Assange's arrest
On 2019-04-11 13:16, John Young wrote: New TV link of Assange arrest: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stTMt1tLT4g There are already 3 pages of minute-by-minute reporting on the arrest, pbly m few more to come: https://www.theguardian.com/media/live/2019/apr/11/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-arrested-at-the-ecuadorean-embassy-live-updates # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
