Julian Assange Discussion

[RyanX]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

There is certainly some slander out there directed at Julian, but there are also a number of criticisms, which are not baseless.

Really, and you know this how...mainstream media...magic 8 ball? I've seen some of Julian's research and documentation ...where's yours?

Guardian,

I actually posted some of what I consider constructive criticisms of Julian's handling of the AWD in my previous post. Other members have posted criticisms which are not baseless too.

If you have more research and documentation to present, please do so. I've noticed you've posted some good data so far and I thank you for that. Nobody is trying to hide anything or slander anybody here.

I don't consider it unobjective or accusatory to consider all of the possibilities of "how?" or "why?" or "who benefits?" from the AWD.

"Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks"

This Topic is blatant a lie....one of MANY being told about Julian and Wikileaks all over the net. I've seen him called a "Villain" "Traitor" "Zionist puppet" etc. etc. by people who'd never heard of him before the Collateral Murder video. This is such a classic case of "Kill the Messenger" it would be funny if Julian's life was not on the line.

<snip>

Guardian,

We could go on and on with this, but in the end it seems that you've made up your mind and no amount of arguing or evidence will change that. Nobody here is asking anybody to pick a side, we're just trying to get to the bottom of all this.

If you don't want to look at your emotional attachments and sacred cows and Work on yourself, that is your choice - but this is a big component of the forum and Network here and we've generally found that Working in this way leads to more Objective discussion as well as personal growth. Just remember you can't think about the way you think with the way you think.

 

[agni]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Hi Guardian,

Have you read any Gurdjieff ? He once said something like: "Everyone is dog crap, unless proven otherwise". (sorry do not have exact quote)

And you know, it makes sense & healthy attitude to have in pathological world we inhibit. It's a given we are STS and live in STS world, where split between 3D STS & STO is in not anywhere close to 50/50. Given that, why give everyone neutral/fair ground so to speak ? Probability of chances that any given 3D being is serving STS agenda (by choice or not) is far more then 50%.

 

[Guardian]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Maxamillian Forte takes a balanced look at the Wikileaks Afgan War Diary.

This subjects them to the possibility of being executed by the Taleban, and it will be thanks to Wikileaks.

What a load

Wikileaks announced the pending publication and gave copies of the documents to 3 mainstream media sources more than a month in advance. The only real question is which one gave a copy to their US controllers first? Why do you think WL did that? Perhaps to give the US and NATO ample opportunity to withdraw any sources who might be endangered?

Reporters from all three news agencies have been interviewing victims all over Afghanistan regarding the Diaries for over a month. The "Taliban" announced they are going headhunting for snitches any minute now on the front page of their newspaper. If there is still anyone in Afghanistan who narced out their neighbor for US cash ... it's NOT Wikileaks fault!

 

[Guardian]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

And you know, it makes sense & healthy attitude to have in pathological world we inhibit. It's a given we are STS and live in STS world, where split between 3D STS & STO is in not anywhere close to 50/50. Given that, why give everyone neutral/fair ground so to speak ?

Because I don't want to become what I stand against.

 

[Joe]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Really? Then why would a SOTT Editor post that Julian is a "Villain" (and other rude slander) on my Facebook page today after I decided to just ignore this thread?

What editor and what was posted?

It was Joe..and I deleted the post so you'll need to ask him for the exact wording.

Sorry about that Guardian, I wasn't actually aware that that was you on FB, and I wasn't aware of this thread when I wrote that comment on the video you posted. I can't remember the exact wording of my comment, but it was very short and referenced the blurb on the video which referred to Assange as "hero or villian". So that was where the "villian" part of my comment came from, it was simply expressing my opinion based on those two options. I think I may have said something else about him being a dupe, but whatever the exact words, I don't think it constituted slander, either of Assange or you. However, if you think it was rude, then I apologise and will be more careful about spontaneously writing anything on your FB page in the future, especially now that I know which FB profile is you.

 

[agni]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

And you know, it makes sense & healthy attitude to have in pathological world we inhibit. It's a given we are STS and live in STS world, where split between 3D STS & STO is in not anywhere close to 50/50. Given that, why give everyone neutral/fair ground so to speak ?

Because I don't want to become what I stand against.

I do not understand, how does above exactly make you what you stand against ?

 

[Gonzo]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

I am saddened that you cannot see where you are blind, even though it has been pointed out to you succinctly on several occasions.

The thread has evolved into a discussion and analysis, as per the forum's purpose, which is required to seek the objective truth.

You seem to have gotten hung up on seeing anything that questions Assange's intent as an attack on the benefits derived from disclosure.

You seem to get attached to the stated purpose of a group if their actions align with your principles but do not appear to be able to see the bigger picture. This closes you off to considering any and all possibilities for each and every decision point in your life.

Could it be that your black and white thinking is akin to "throwing the baby out with the bath water", in the sense that your mind won't allow you to see negative attributes in things you hold dear to your heart? Was there a time when you experienced the absence of unconditional love from a parent or loved one early in your childhood, and thus formulated black and white thinking, where things need to be perfect or they aren't worthy of love? This is merely a guess on my part, as there could be myriad possibilities that contribute to such thinking, but I thought the most obvious explanation a good starting point.

Please remember you are truly loved here, not for what you think, not for the groups to which you attach yourself and not for your principles, but because of who you are, deep inside, beneath all of these buffers. I hope you can allow yourself to accept this reality.

Gonzo

 

[anart]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

This thread was started with an extremely misleading (and well proven) lie about Wikileaks.

At the time the thread was started, the title used the content of the article. It was unknown at that time whether it was a lie or not. You are engaging in what is described 'legalistic thinking' which narrows your perspective.

I've seen VERY little of the alleged "objectivity" applied to them. What I have seen is a bunch of folks rushing to write a review of the movie while the opening credits are still rolling, with total disregard for the people they're so quick to vilify.

You are not seeing reality as it is.

Of course I know I could be wrong about Julian/Wikileaks...I believe I said that on the first page.

Then why are you on this emotional crusade about it?

I also know I could be wrong about this group/Fellowship.

That has nothing to do with this conversation. The Fellowship doesn't need blind believers, it needs people with open minds, critical thinking and the ability to look at themselves and the world as it is.

Of the two, I've known about Wikileaks MUCH longer.

The two aren't even vaguely related, and you comparing them this way is a bit of emotional manipulation, actually. It puts members of the Fellowship 'on the back foot' so to say, as if we need to prove ourselves when there is nothing to prove.

By Perceval's logic, if you are what you say you are, you shouldn't still be alive...and neither should I, or a dozen other folks I know. Anyone who actually manages to come up with a way to shine a light on any of the multiple horrors around us should be dead? That standard kinda reminds me of the old Witch Ducking stool.

Not at all. This is evidence of black and white thinking on your part.

What Perceval is saying is that if Julian truly had information or the ability to decidedly damage (and here I mean REALLY damage in the long term) the PTBs machinations, he would be dead or disappeared. The examples of this happening are too numerous to list and certainly you are aware of them. You'll notice that 'we' do not go sticking sticks into hornet's nests regarding the PTB, we focus on what may actually have an effect and allow us to continue to fight another day.

Guardian, you are not thinking clearly - at all.

No Laura, I'm not sure about Julian, any more than I'm sure about you, or ANYONE else for that matter.

Again, Julian has nothing to do with Laura, or anyone else for that matter.

Even if I was "sure" today, new information could make me not so sure tomorrow. There are some weeks when I change my opinions more often than I change my underwear

Then this knowledge about yourself should allow you to refrain from becoming bull-headed and going on emotional crusades, rather than coolly and calmly analyzing the available data in any situation.

What I do know, with absolute certainty, is that it's wrong to trash anyone's efforts to improve the human condition until I'm sure they're running a scam.

No one is doing that - this is again black and white thinking. Examining a situation without emotional attachment to the outcome is NOT trashing someone.

Laura, Julian and any other voice in the wilderness deserves my respect and protection for trying to speak out....until I KNOW there is a hidden intent.

Again, Laura and Julian have nothing to do with one another, so this comparison makes little sense. Your statement that any voice in the wilderness deserves your respect makes little sense as well, since any voice in the wilderness could be saying ANY thing - do lies, subterfuge, manipulation, etc deserve your respect?

All that is being pointed out to you here is that intent and content is more important than image/personality/ideals you project onto others.

I really don't see any difference between what's been done to Laura & Ark and what's currently being done to Julian, on a much larger scale.

That's because you are not seeing things as they really are. You are clouded by emotional thinking.

Are all the insults, nasty names, and baseless accusations that have been hurled at Laura and Ark justified because people are just "examining all the possibilities?"

This is irrelevant. Laura and Ark have nothing to do with Julian - on any level. They are two wholly different situations. It is also what is considered a 'straw man argument'. Your thinking is cloudy, Guardian, which is really concerning to me since you are not an unintelligent woman.

Maybe, just maybe, Julian and the rest of the folks at Wikileaks have feelings too.

Emotional projection will not get you closer to the truth - ever.

 

[Guardian]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Sorry about that Guardian, I wasn't actually aware that that was you on FB, and I wasn't aware of this thread when I wrote that comment on the video you posted. I can't remember the exact wording of my comment, but it was very short and referenced the blurb on the video which referred to Assange as "hero or villian". So that was where the "villian" part of my comment came from, it was simply expressing my opinion based on those two options. I think I may have said something else about him being a dupe, but whatever the exact words, I don't think it constituted slander, either of Assange or you. However, if you think it was rude, then I apologise and will be more careful about spontaneously writing anything on your FB page in the future, especially now that I know which FB profile is you.

Thanks Perceval.... I thought you knew it was me and were intentionally taking a poke at Julian on my profile because I'm facebook "friends" with several Wikileaks supporters.

 

[Guardian]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

And you know, it makes sense & healthy attitude to have in pathological world we inhibit. It's a given we are STS and live in STS world, where split between 3D STS & STO is in not anywhere close to 50/50. Given that, why give everyone neutral/fair ground so to speak ?

Because I don't want to become what I stand against.

I do not understand, how does above exactly make you what you stand against ?

Because I believe that giving EVERYONE a fair chance is the STO thing to do. :)

 

[agni]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

And you know, it makes sense & healthy attitude to have in pathological world we inhibit. It's a given we are STS and live in STS world, where split between 3D STS & STO is in not anywhere close to 50/50. Given that, why give everyone neutral/fair ground so to speak ?

Because I don't want to become what I stand against.

I do not understand, how does above exactly make you what you stand against ?

Because I believe that giving EVERYONE a fair chance is the STO thing to do. :)

Whether you like it or not - you are STS. I understand your want. But there is a huge difference between when you play and when you are being played so to speak. Just because you are empathetic human being, it does not free you from participating in serving or practicing STS agenda, despite your wants and intentions, if there is no knowledge of what is happening on bigger scale applied. Ever heard expression: "Road to hell is paved with good intentions ? "

Personally, I would certainly think twice before giving a fair chance to psychopath, manipulative person, or simply to an unconscious machine. I'd rather be aware and go from there. Giving everyone a fair chance might be STO thing to do in balanced world, but I find it as a grave error in STS world we are part of, because I am more than certain such attitude will make one played.

 

[Joe]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

And you know, it makes sense & healthy attitude to have in pathological world we inhibit. It's a given we are STS and live in STS world, where split between 3D STS & STO is in not anywhere close to 50/50. Given that, why give everyone neutral/fair ground so to speak ?

Because I don't want to become what I stand against.

I do not understand, how does above exactly make you what you stand against ?

Because I believe that giving EVERYONE a fair chance is the STO thing to do. :)

I may be wrong, but I'd say that STO is based on knowledge, as much of it as possible. If you gather enough information about the powers that be, to the extent that you know their methods because you have seen them at work time and time again, then that knowledge should be applied. If you see a case where you see the same type of methodology at work, it is not STO to give those concerned a "fair chance", because your knowledge has allowed you to make a different determination, or at the very least suggests that one determination is more likely than others.

 

[mamadrama]

Re: Wikileaks & AWD's

Because I believe that giving EVERYONE a fair chance is the STO thing to do.

Ok, if this is one of your guiding principles, then it would be helpful and logical for you to give us the same fair chance to suss out what is happening in this situation, yes? You have mentioned several times that 'we' really have a good grip on what's going on on this planet, so why not trust the process here a little more? Don't you think, chances are we'll uncover the truth, as much as is possible, despite taking a possible wrong turn here or there every now and then?

I could be wrong but it seems this discussion has mostly activated your "protection" program. Try looking at that. You are very used to guarding and protecting those you deem to be innocent, but it seems that program and its emotionalism is getting in your way here. We are not the enemy. Looking at all of the angles is necessary when trying to discern the truth of the matter.

 

[go2]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Julian and any other voice in the wilderness deserves my respect and protection for trying to speak out....until I KNOW there is a hidden intent.

Guardian, Julian Assange and Wikileaks are not a voice in the wilderness. He is part of a well financed and organized PSYOPS. You know he is working with the Guardian, the New York Times and Der Spiegal. He has appeared on dozens of news programs, including Larry King of CNN. How can he be a voice in the wilderness? He is the darling of the MSM. What is your motive in painting a false picture of Julian Assange as a heroic dissenter in your statement quoted above?

 

[Joe]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

The wikileaks business has been hyped beyond all reckoning as far as I'm concerned. The logs detail 195 civilian deaths and 174 casualties. WOW! And they tell us that "black ops" soldiers go around shooting anyone they think might be a Taleban leader. Earth-shaking! Most of the material, though classified "secret" at the time, is no longer militarily sensitive. AND THAT'S IT! No word of the actual civilian death toll, somewhere in the 30,000s. No word of Bagram AFB, where thousands have been tortured, women and children included. Those details have been in the public domain for years, but get almost NO mainstream coverage. But as soon as Assange comes along with his super secret "war logs"- hot off the US military's press machine - the media are falling over themselves to sign him up! No wonder! It's reliable information! It came from the US military after all!

Assange, on behalf of the US DOD, has sold the world a complete dud in exchange for 5 mins of fame for himself. Sweet deal. The guy's either a dupe or an agent, and I've had enough BS for one lifetime already. I wish wikileaks had never been created by the CIA.

Caveat....that's my opinion, everyone else on this forum is entitled to their own.