The people currently "backing" Assange with actual operational resources go by variations on the name "Pirate party" and have infiltrated several circles of the international elite.

They have people in banking, international relations, the computer industry (at all levels), and Hollywood (at all levels). They may also have a base of operations in Israel but are NOT supported by Israel's official ruling party. They do apparently have some fairly open supporters in the IDF and other Israeli government agencies. Those I have seen pictures of are white, very white, like that almost inbred South African white look.

They are active at several levels in the UK, and quite likely Ireland but my initial research shows them to more likely to operate out of London.

They have active support in the US obviously mostly in Leftist circles, but as we can see from their fights with the Democrats over what they consider "internet Freedom" they don't follow the Democrat party line.

This whole thing is their operation and they have proven operationally competent in the past. I suspect they would share resources with a few transnational revolutionary groups which have remained more or less independent, like the Zapatistas in Mexico or some of the pacific Islander groups.

If you make contact with any of these people, maintain it, but keep it under wraps as they might prove useful. I understand they had previously been tolerated by at least some factions of the CIA since they were considering Iran to be open season (hence their tolerance from the Mossad at various levels). Generally speaking they have been running with support of "allied" countries other than the US, but increasingly got at odds with the official UK government over various local issues.

The Anarchists are pro-gun and pro-freedom which on the surface of it makes them "not enemies" although for those of us with strong ties to the US military, we cringe and grit our teeth over this whole thing of them engaging in hostile espionage against what has been "our" military.

At the outset of this whole militia movement thing, and the underground cells forming among military and police people, those of us in the military basically set the policy that we would engage in actions which don't threaten national security, and the police guys would not engage in actions which victimize the general public (roughly parallel to the oathkeepers official statements, which our people wrote anyway).

Now this stuff with Assange, well, that threatens national security to a large degree, but I am not calling shots on that either, and then so much wrong has been done in the name of national security that it muddies the waters too.

They consider themselves a counter balance to the existing world power infrastructure. They have a lot of the same values we have, but if we fully and openly align with them, we might be aligning with some people who are outright seditionists and committing wartime treason to some degree, providing aid to enemies of our guys still in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Now "leaking" the embassy "wires" which is just basically a subscription news service only open to embassy personnel with various clearances (which are obviously not that hard to get), that's not such a big deal. Information of combat importance in the sandbox is relevant, but all I have seen so far is stuff that is not particularly mission-threateningly groundbreaking.

This is a real delicate issue that we need to tiptoe around. I think some of the info those people might have is useful, and as a whole they are more useful alive than dead, but like with Jim Stachowiak or Christopher Monfort, we might not want to make their fights our fights either way. What we ought to do is sit back watch, listen and learn.

These "net anarchists" are the people most likely to come up with some good functional internet alternatives and defense mechanisms to "big brother" which is definitely not going to be any friend of freedom. Those skills, resources and connections are something we are probably going to be needing.