Julian Assange Discussion

Re: Youtube video blocked in Australia

Tigersoap said:
Dingo said:
Oh well. The video was about the former partner of Wikileaks and some info he thought regarding wikileaks

Ah I don't know why you can't watch it though, I can't either.
Maybe someone uploaded another version on youtube, which you may be able to access ?

This was the description:
Wikileaks co-founder (who parted with the organization over policy issues) says Wikileaks is funded either by a corrupt organization or a government agency and that all leaks are intentional.

Nothing new here of course, just wanted to watch it, but I searched in youtube and found nothing
 
Re: Youtube video blocked in Australia

Or here

_http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/07/26/intv.wikileaks.founder.caution.cnn?hpt=T1
 
Re: Youtube video blocked in Australia

Tigersoap said:
Or here

_http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/07/26/intv.wikileaks.founder.caution.cnn?hpt=T1

Yeah, thanks for that, I've actually seen this already, but in checking my source, the video being referenced was posted July 29th, which suggests it was the same video

Sorry about that, a complete waste of your time :-[
 
Dingo said:
Tigersoap said:
Or here

_http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/07/26/intv.wikileaks.founder.caution.cnn?hpt=T1

Yeah, thanks for that, I've actually seen this already, but in checking my source, the video being referenced was posted July 29th, which suggests it was the same video

Sorry about that, a complete waste of your time :-[

Actually, it's not a complete waste of time. (I've merged this with the Wikileaks thread since that is the topic of the video in question." It should definitely be added to the databank of things to consider about Wikileaks.

This former partner in the founding of Wikileaks who is so critical of Assange and the current "leaks" has his own leak site: http://www.cryptome.org/

He doesn't strike me as the "getting revenge on Julian" type and he apparently knows the score in the "hacktivist" world.
 
Oh my, having a look at the top document on cryptome.org... one has to take this with a shaker of salt, I think.

5 December 2010

Wikileaks DADT

A sends:

The unexplained delay by the Swedish Prosecution Authority in advancing the case against Julian Assange may be due to the time needed to complete blood tests on the alleged victims for sexually transmitted disease, especially for HIV, tests for which require 6 to 12 weeks, rather than for pregnancy test results obtainable much quicker.

If the sexual activity was in part anal in which condom breakage is common, condom failure would have terrified the other parties suddenly confronted with the threat of bi-sexual misogyny characterized by female seduction as prelude to conflicted male homophilic aggression -- residue of witnessed father-and-mother coupling parental incest desire.

If HIV is suspected, or found, there is a requirement to track other potential victims by interviews and other forms of tracing. This begins with testing of the transmitter, if available and willing, followed by interviews on the sexual history of the transmitter and suspected victims, then notification and testing of suspects. The time required for this can be lengthy or short depending on the history and candor of the transmitter, many of whom lie to evade culpability.

These investigations are customarily kept confidential to induce candid revelations. In some instances courts may order disclosure if a transmitter balks so that affected parties can receive tests and medical care.

Beyond this, Assange is suspected of being bi-sexually promiscuous and not attentive to partners after brief or extended relationships, often concurrently multiple as in the Swedish instance, in which he insists on being a dominant controller and insensitive to the after-needs of his companions.

More generally, defiance toward him leads to immediate breakoff of relationships, with dissidents blamed and denigrated.

He has repeatedly demonstrated intolerance toward those he recruits for his various ventures, Wikileaks the latest. He recruits with flattery of targets and promises of important stature in the actions, maintains dominance over those less capable than he with vulgar bragging about his recruitment successes, and dismisses anyone who challenges his supremacy. Refusing or walking out of interviews and halting discussions is typical. He much prefers to orate without interruption, inveterately solipsistic.

He is hyper-sensitive to criticism and loses his temper rather than answer disagreements. He believes he is smarter than his doubters and has no patience with those who do not succumb to flattery, oration and bullying.

In turn, he craves praise and flattery, and becomes depressed and suicidal if he does not get those from admirers he cultivates for that purpose -- susceptible adorants and especially those more notable than he. "Kicks down, kisses up."

He has left a trail of persons infected by what he promises, were used by him so long as they were believers, then abandoned when not. His wife and children among them; only his mother remains as loyal as a dominating wife -- perhaps the source of his misogynism and homophilic longing for a dominant father (a characterisic among many shared with Obama).

He suffers an emotional and intellectual messianism for which he believes there is no antidote. He does not expect to be punished for infecting with promises of glory and love as done with Bradley Manning and others yet untracked. If he is also spreading a fatal disease such as HIV he is intentionally sacrificing victims as his last god-like action so common in narcissists.

His quick cooperation with Swedish blood tests could put this frightening scenario to rest, or provide aid for immediate treatment of those who may have been victimized. This can be done quietly without public disclosure although Wikileaks has published confidential sexual investigations with names of innocents.

This description of Assange is almost word-for-word the description of the schizoidal psychopath.
 
More docs about Assange and Wikileaks are available on the cryptome site and definitely worth reading.
 
http://www.businessinsider.com/remember-when-julian-assange-and-wikileaks-were-cool-2010-12

Excerpt:

Meanwhile, the organization has certainly discovered the art of over-promising, the latest Cablegate docs being a prime example. If there's anything scandalous in them, it's that the US government isn't evil enough. There's no talk of toppling foreign governments. No examples of breaking international law. No assassination talk. Nothing. Of course if you didn't bother to read any details, you'd think there had been some massive breach of America's dirtiest secrets that ripped the veil off the cloak and dagger world of the US diplomatic corps (of course, US politicians calling Wikileaks a "terrorist" organization only help to blow the docs out of proportion).
 
Another perspective:

http://www.siliconrepublic.com/new-media/item/19450-who-is-on-trial-assange/

Excerpt:

The enormity of what Assange has done from an information perspective is incredible. ...

If the charges against what he is alleged to have done in Sweden are real, then shame on Assange.

But supposing for argument’s sake they are trumped up in a clumsy effort to shut him up or shut down Wikileaks then shame on Sweden and shame on the world.

Quite simply a new era has begun, secrets can no longer be kept forever. Perhaps it is time those in positions of power learned to behave better themselves? Or better still, not have secrets.
 
If there's anything scandalous in them, it's that the US government isn't evil enough. There's no talk of toppling foreign governments. No examples of breaking international law. No assassination talk. Nothing.

Yep, but I don't think State Department or diplomatic core communication leaks are probably the best place to find much damaging information anyhow. I'm under the impression diplomats are used and duped more often that not when the secret team involves them in their fun and games.
 
Black Swan said:
Yep, but I don't think State Department or diplomatic core communication leaks are probably the best place to find much damaging information anyhow. I'm under the impression diplomats are used and duped more often that not when the secret team involves them in their fun and games.

Yup. Diplomats only know what the CIA feeds to them, what the CIA wants them to think or think they know. In short, it's really like third hand disinfo. Assange should be able to suss that out and at least be picky about his leaks, one would think.

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/988.html

Julian Assange

He's a guy with a vague history...

Who travels the world without visible means of support...

His parents: Members of an LSD "cult" that abused kids...

Hmmm...

He's not against war...

He hates the 9/11 truth movement...

He has no info about the Bush or Obama White House...or the Federal Reserve Bank...or Goldman Sachs (but he is helping take down Bank of America)...

His "leaks" paint Pakistan as a threat and foreign politicians the CIA doesn't like as jerks...

He believes Osama is alive...and probably in Pakistan...

Everything else he "leaks" is stuff we all already knew...

The mainstream media loves him...

The right wingers love to hate him and are using him as a justification to censor the Net...

If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and smells like a duck...

Another intelligence agency spectacle.
 
Since we are developing pretty good ideas about how the PTB operate through the intelligence community, I would postulate that even the CIA doesn't know what their own agency does or knows.

Compartmentalization is the name of the game. Therefore, it is highly likely that both the diplomatic corp and most of the CIA have no idea to what extent they are used as pawns in a bigger game.

Using that logic, even Assange would know either nothing or just enough to motivate him. As well, his controllers, if there are any (and I can't imagine there not being any in such a situation), only know what they need to know to operate within the scope of their own area of operation.

If Assange has ulterior motives, for example, to prop up Israeli interests, he would either have initiated his own mission or been tasked with the mission.

At this point, I see no evidence to suggest he is anything beyond a useful idiot on a personal, albeit veiled mission at best and, at worst, an agent of disinformation and obfuscation with limited knowledge of the bigger picture.

It certainly is telling how he dismisses the 9/11 truth movement. I do wonder if this is resulting simply from a pro-Zion mindset, part of a script he had handed or brainwashing.

A useful idiot nonetheless and therefore, sadly, he probably has an expiry date beyond his awareness.

Gonzo
 
Since we are developing pretty good ideas about how the PTB operate through the intelligence community, I would postulate that even the CIA doesn't know what their own agency does or knows.

Hi Gonzo,

Good call.

Fletcher Prouty in his book The Secret Team describes covert forces within the CIA that infiltrate all areas of Gov’t, hence the title.
 
Gonzo said:
It certainly is telling how he dismisses the 9/11 truth movement. I do wonder if this is resulting simply from a pro-Zion mindset, part of a script he had handed or brainwashing.

A useful idiot nonetheless and therefore, sadly, he probably has an expiry date beyond his awareness.

Gonzo

As a respected researcher I know wrote to me today:

Just the fact Assange refers to 9/11 truth as “nonsense” says it all, I think. The guy simply is too smart not to have figured it out soon after it happened.

His “leaks” are carefully crafted to a) keep the public focus away from the growing awareness of the 9/11 coverup, and b) to work on the sheeple, subliminally, with the logic, “If there were anything at all to 9/11, these guys would have surely blown the lid.”

Let’s face it: 9/11 Truth would be the ultimate leak. Ergo, people are being led to believe that if “hundreds of thousands of documents” contain not a shred of evidence of 9/11 being an inside job, all truthers must be nutters.

9/11 IS EVERYTHING. In the grand scheme of things, nothing else really matters. Expose 9/11, and the whole house of cards instantly crumbles.

And if the press is mis-quoting him on that topic, he can surely produce a "Wikileak" to correct the error.
 
I feared I was overstating the obvious in my earlier post but I felt there might have been some readers not quite up to speed on how things work in intel circles and the layers of compartments. I imagine even the Secret Team has secret teams.

As well, my mention of Assange's brushing off the 9/11 truth movement was also speaking the obvious. I should have gone into more detail that, since most of us who have realized the modus operandi see the red flag, he obviously is playing to the dormant masses.

Apologies if I created noise.

Gonzo
 
Back
Top Bottom