Julian Assange Discussion

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Guardian said:
Nope ....Prouty didn't write anything in "Secret Team" that made me suddenly want to listen to anonymous slander....I still prefer to look at evidence and results. :)

I don't think it's anonymous slander so much as pointing out the fact that EVERYTHING that really affects anything is controlled. Everything. If you think it's not, then you just haven't looked deeply enough yet. If it's not controlled, it is destroyed, undermined, vectored or rendered powerless. Do not, for one second, underestimate the level of control present on this planet.

I would LOVE to think wikileaks is the one shining beacon of exception to this rule. I've just been around the block too many times to take anything at face value, especially where money (and, sorry, but that level of travel and international interaction is a LOT of money) and ramifications on large organizations and governments are concerned. This planet just doesn't work that way - there are always hands behind the curtain, at one level or another. I would love to be wrong, though.
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

anart said:
I don't think it's anonymous slander so much as pointing out the fact that EVERYTHING that really affects anything is controlled. Everything.

Well yes...but the real question is "controlled by who/what?"

If you think it's not, then you just haven't looked deeply enough yet. If it's not controlled, it is destroyed, undermined, vectored or rendered powerless.

Do you include this Board, FOTCM, QFS, etc. in this very sad, foregone conclusion? :cry:

Do not, for one second, underestimate the level of control present on this planet.

I try not to... It does get a bit murky when the controllers start fighting among themselves. :shock:

I would LOVE to think wikileaks is the one shining beacon of exception to this rule.

I would love to prove wikileaks is one of several shining beacons of exception to this rule.....but I guess we'll just have to wait and see what actually happens. ;)

I've just been around the block too many times to take anything at face value, especially where money (and, sorry, but that level of travel and international interaction is a LOT of money)

1000 people donating $50.00 a month sounds about right...and not all that difficult to achieve.

This planet just doesn't work that way - there are always hands behind the curtain, at one level or another.

Agreed...again I think it's a matter of who's hands are behind the curtain, at one level or another.

I would love to be wrong, though.

I would love to be right...just for a change of pace :rolleyes:
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Guardian said:
Well yes...but the real question is "controlled by who/what?"

Yep, though at the top, that question becomes easier to answer.

g said:
Do you include this Board, FOTCM, QFS, etc. in this very sad, foregone conclusion? :cry:

Well, we're not taking down or threatening multi-national corporations, governments or even small corporations - in short - we've been sidelined since the beginning, so it's a little different. With that said, we are always - without exception - alert to and watching for influences that we are blind to that control us and our actions. We question EVERYTHING - most importantly ourselves in an attempt to limit the interference as much as possible. Nothing is beyond question, though - not even us.


g said:
I try not to... It does get a bit murky when the controllers start fighting among themselves. :shock:

That's a great point, actually - there are controllers who work at cross-purposes and it can get really complicated to figure out which witch is which. One can often only begin to tell the same way you can tell the wind is blowing - you see the movement of the trees, not the wind itself.


g said:
I would love to prove wikileaks is one of several shining beacons of exception to this rule.....but I guess we'll just have to wait and see what actually happens. ;)

We always do, eventually!


g said:
1000 people donating $50.00 a month sounds about right...and not all that difficult to achieve.

That would be a start, but just a start. ;)

g said:
I would love to be right...just for a change of pace :rolleyes:

Change of pace... puuhhlleeeeezz :lol2:
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

I think what separates this forum/board as well as the Cass communications is the increased FRV derived through increased awareness that affords a higher degree of shielding and protection.

The vigilance level might be similar to a few places, but you can only be vigilant to what you know and are aware of.

I highly doubt that anyone in WL has achieved such a level of protection.
They seem stuck in the mechanics of ordinary reality, fighting the man, oblivious to the hyperdimensional controls, including time travel and thought projection capacities.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

To think WL is above such control or affect is wishful thinking and makes one food and a vector possibility.

Gonzo
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Just one more ingredient to add to this stew, since mention has been made of Fletcher Prouty. In his book 'JFK', Prouty talks about how the Pentagon Papers were a 'grandiose cover-story creation' used to 'conceal and obfuscate the facts of the Kennedy administration', and became available to the public when '...Daniel Ellsberg, who had worked in Vietnam with Lansdale and Conein, found a way to make the documents available to certain major newspapers in June 1971.' (p.269)

Edward G. Lansdale was OSS/ CIA. Lucien Conein was CIA. Ellsberg occupies a lofty leftish/ progressive/ pro-peace perch and is considered to be a hero for the truth, but it is of interest to note also that he served in the Marine Corps, got a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard, and worked for the Rand Corp. Bearing all that in mind, it is interesting that he is, in the following interview, reinforcing the legitimacy of WikiLeaks and its founder and also that a connection is being made in the minds of people between Julian Assange and the famous whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg.


from interview on MSNBC, Fri June 11, 2010
Full transcript:
RATIGAN: Do you see direct parallels between what’s developing here and what you went through?
ELLSBURG: Yes, there does seem to be an immediate parallel between me and whoever leaked the video on the assault on the 19 or 20 Iraqis. Someone–allegedly, it was Bradley Manning–did feel that that deserved to be out. the “Reuters,” whose newspapermen were killed in the course of that, had been trying to get that through the freedom of information act for two years, as I understand it and had been refused. Let’s say whoever did it, hypothetically, Bradley Manning, showed better judgment in putting it out than the people who kept is secret from the American people and from the Iraqis.
RATIGAN: What is your sense of disclosure of information to the American people today, compared to the period of time that you lived through, where there was similar issues with, with the perception of reality of information being withheld from the public?
ELLSBURG: Look, there’s no doubt at all, that enormous amounts of energy that should be made public are being withheld and that hundreds, probably thousands of people, I’m speaking now of the run-up to the Iraq war, which has a very great similarity to the lying and the secrecy that got us into Vietnam. I think if many people had recognized that their oath of office, which called them in to support the Constitution, really contradicted their promise to keep certain secrets, when those secrets concealed lies, concealed deception to the American public and getting us into a hopeless war, they should have given priority to the oath of office and they should have put that information out to Congress and the public. They should have done what I wish I had done much earlier than I did I had been in that position, too. I knew years before the Pentagon Papers came out that the Americans were being lied in to an essentially hopeless war. I’m not proud of the fact that it didn’t occur to me that my oath of office, which was to support the Constitution, called on me to put that information out and say, ‘64, when the war might have been avoided. But I certainly am glad that I finally came aware of what my real responsibilities were there. And I did put it out years later. At times, at that time, which published it, the “Times,” and the 18 other newspapers, which defied President Nixon’s injunctions and did put it out, were in the position of Julian Assange is in now. I’m very happy that he put it out and I congratulate him for it.
RATIGAN: What was your conclusion as to the direct liability for you? I know that at one point you faced life imprisonment. What do you perceive to be the liability for whoever the leak may be to asange, Mr. Manning or anybody else?
ELLSBURG: I didn’t understand that we don’t have an official secrets act in this country, criminalizing the disclosure of certain information. Except with certain narrow forms of information which is not involved in the pentagon papers or in this. The nuclear weapons data. The identities of covert agents, those things are subject to law. The classification system as a whole is an administrative system that doesn’t have legal force in this country. We’re almost alone among countries in that. I didn’t know that at the time. I assumed I must be breaking some law, that we had some equivalent. And so i didn’t know to start with, that I was the first person ever prosecuted for a leak. The first person to have the Espionage Act provisions used not for espionage, but for revealing information to the American public. There have only been a couple of people who have been indicted since then. Samuel Loring Morrison. And the APEC under George W. Bush. The only cases and conviction was for Morrison. President Obama, who came in promptsing transparency in government, and an end to the excessive secrecy has totally violated that pledge. and it so happens that he’s not only brought two indictments, more than any other president for leaking before any other president had done. but with now, with Bradley Manning, under arrest, if he’s under prosecution, that will be three. A new, a new record for President Obama. That’s really not the kind of change I voted for when I voted for him.
RATIGAN: Phillip, what is your understand of where Mr. Assange is right now and how highly desired he is as a target, of either state department or pentagon investigators?
SHENON: We in the press corps would like to know where he is, we have no idea. He was supposed to speak at a panel in Las Vegas, but he apparently canceled on them at the last minute. He was supposed to appear in New York last week at a separate conference you made reference to. He chose not to attend and was apparently in his native Australia.
RATIGAN: His absence is one thing, an understanding of the degree of interest is one thing, and federal government is the other. Do you have a sense of whether his absence correlates to avoiding the American authorities in any way?
SHENON: Yeah, he said last week, at this New York gathering that he had been instructed by his lawyers not to return to the United States.
ELLSBURG: You know, may I say, the expression he used, I was supposed to do a dialogue with him at that conference, that’s why I went to New York. And he explained, the explanation he used was that he was understood that it was not safe for him to come to this country. And then later he explained now when the Bradley Manning arrest was announced, he said now you understand why I didn’t come. I think it’s worth mentioning a very new and ominous development in our country. I think he would not be safe, even physically entirely, wherever he is. We have after all for the first time, that I ever perhaps in any Democratic country, we have a president who has announced that he feels he has the right to use special operations operatives against anyone abroad, that he thinks is associated with terrorism. That he suspects of it. And that includes American citizens. One American citizen has even been named. Now Assange is not an American citizen. But I listen to that with a special interest. Because I was in fact the subject of a White House hit squad in November on May 3rd, 1972. A dozen Cuban assets were brought up from Miami with orders, quote, quoting the prosecutor, to incapacitate Daniel Ellsberg totally. on the steps of the capital, it so happens when i was in a rally during the vietnam war. And I asked the prosecutor, what does that mean, kill me? And he said, the words were “to incapacitate you totally.” But you should understand, these guides, meaning these c.i.a. operatives never use the word “kill.” i actually think it was to silence me at that particular time. For worries they had that I would leak president Nixon’s nuclear threats, which he was making at that precise time in 1972. Now as I look at Assange’s case, they’re worried that he will reveal current threats. I would have to say puts his well-being, his physical life, in some danger now. And I say that with anguish. I think it’s astonishing that an American president should have put out that policy and he’s not getting these resistance from it, from congress, the press, the courts or anything. it’s an amazing development that I think Assange would do well to keep his whereabouts unknown.
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks


The material below was sourced by Arthur Zbygniew from the Wayne Madsen Report and John Young of Cryptome. These journalists have a different perspective on Julian Assange and his NGO associates than the campaign by Daniel Ellsberg and the viral and sensational "war porn" video release and the subsequent drama which appears to be a intelligence operation designed to confer legitimacy to an asset.

The "war porn" video is meaningless within the vast archive of the slaughter of more than one million Iraqis. In my opinion, it trivializes the war crimes of United States government officials and others who ordered and carried out these horrific crimes against humanity. I believe this video was released by those complicit in these crimes, furthering the continuing criminal operation in Iraq and securing credibility for an asset to be used in future psychological warfare operations against mankind.

http://arthurzbygniew.blogspot.com/2010/03/soros-co-back-wikileaks-kosher-mob-oval.html said:
Wikileaks claims it is the first website dedicated to revealing sensitive and classified information. This is false. In fact, Cryptome, founded by New York City architect John Young, was the first and Wikileaks is a mere poor facsimile. John Young once proudly proclaimed to this editor that he would likely become America's "first political prisoner" from the Internet. Young's Cryptome has gone far beyond Wikileaks by publishing a list of British MI-6 agents, Microsoft's manual on how it conducts surveillance for U.S. law enforcement, photos of Guantanamo and a list of the detainees imprisoned there, and even overhead photos of Dick Cheney's home in McLean, Virginia while it was under construction.

And Wikileaks appears to have climbed on to the previous work of others. In 2008, Wikileaks claimed to have obtained, through "hacking," the credit card records of the Norm Coleman Senate campaign in Minnesota. In fact, WMR has been informed that the credit card files, along with the campaign's backup material, was stored by the webmaster in an unprotected folder. It was this file that was downloaded. The "hack" was heralded by MinnesotaIndependent.com, a Soros-funded operation. The illegal operation was never acted upon by law enforcement. In addition, the website PoliticsInMinnesota.com reported on the leak of the files several weeks before the Coleman data appeared on Wikileaks.

It is Young's Cryptome that has been harassed by the U.S. government and Internet Service Providers. Meanwhile, Wikileaks has come up with a fanciful tale of its activists being tailed in Iceland by shadowy Icelandic and American gumshoes and fears that they will be "taken out" before they can air a video at the National Press Club in Washington, DC on April 5 showing a U.S. missile attack on Afghan civilians. There is also a specious claim that the military's encryption codes were somehow broken to obtain the video. If that is true, the real story is that the United States suffered a major compromise of its cryptographic keys, something that has only rarely occurred in the past.

When John Young pulled out of the Wikileaks operation in 2007, suspecting it was a CIA front, there were also early allegations that Wikileaks was funded by Soros. Soros fronts for the CIA by running the operations of Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty, and Radio Free Asia. In fact, one of Wikileaks's advisory board members, Chinese dissident Xiao Qiang, is a commentator for Radio Free Asia.
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

To build on my earlier thoughts after having read more, is that it is totally feasible to have an organization like WL where the main players are actually unaware they are mere pawns. As well, law enforcement and intelligence security officers need not be in the loop as well. In fact. Having as few in the loop makes it easier to lend credibility to the organization.

In such a scenario, those running it would appear honest and their expressed motives align with their past behaviour, because they are honest and true to their cause. As well, by being tracked all around the globe by police and spooks lends further credibility. Those in law enforcement will easily buy into whatever they have been fed, especially if it doesn't contradict information others dig up.

Such a scenario represents the ultimate in plausible deniability because everyone is on the same page except the select few who are sitting quietly in the background, sniffing the data packets as they pass by, listening to the phone conversations, video taping every meet, greet and hand off.

Of course, as was mentioned earlier, the same could be said about Laura and the Cass communications (it was mentioned, I believe, to lend credibility to WL and not to detract from Laura et al), and this is where faith and informed decision making come in.

I believe Laura is genuine. I believe manipulations have always been directed at Laura (and probably many others here) to either direct her away from her path or to self destruct.

But she got stronger instead of weaker and was able to raise her FRV and improve her health to reduce the effects of thought projection, vectors and other nastiness.

This group is managed by people much more aware of the composition of the PTB, including the hyperdimensional characteristics. Knowledge protects and the more you know about the system you are up against, the better you can protect yourself.

Any system that is unaware of the power of the control system and its hyperdimensional facets, WL included, suffers from a blind spot, a chink in their armour.

We do experience members who join this forum with a plan of assault who eventually are uncovered or give themselves away. And there are others who just sit in the background, taking notes on what is said and by whom.

It isn't a stretch to imagine attempts being made to try to sit on a trunk of the internet, close to the Cass forum server if necessary, to sniff packets and work backward to identify where each person's post originated. In my opinion, that's a given.

As well, and I mean no disrespect in this, we have a lot of members who have an affinity for various movements (animal rights, ecology, etc.), myself included, and have made potent emotional investments which hamper the ability to consider other perspectives, affording them a strong drive to advance their well-intentioned beliefs for a variety of reasons, including the hopes of sharing, informing and, ultimately persuading.

Some of us, however, have the potential to become vectors merely by virtue of this strong drive to share a belief or perspective. This drive is a prime mechanism for vectoring in the sense of subjectively persuasion - trying to share their beliefs in the hopes they will be adopted. But if there are flaws in the belief, a blinding to negative aspects, the ignorance of these flaws also get passed along as well, potentially forming a hole for future attacks or manipulation.

By working and sharing in a network like this, however, where objective analysis and perpetual learning increase discernment, hopefully such vectoring is halted sooner than later.

That is why each member has to be vigilant, not just here and on the Internet, but all the time, everywhere, externally and internally.

Vigilance requires as much knowledge as possible about both one's attacker and one's own machine, and one is never done learning.

This is, IMO, what separates this forum from the rest.

Gonzo
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Very well said Gonzo, I fully agree with you. There are many examples in older threads that illustrates what you said very well.
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

go2 said:
The material below was sourced by Arthur Zbygniew from the Wayne Madsen Report and John Young of Cryptome. These journalists have a different perspective on Julian Assange and his NGO associates

http://arthurzbygniew.blogspot.com/2010/03/soros-co-back-wikileaks-kosher-mob-oval.html said:
Wikileaks claims it is the first website dedicated to revealing sensitive and classified information. This is false. In fact, Cryptome, founded by New York City architect John Young, was the first and Wikileaks is a mere poor facsimile. John Young once proudly proclaimed to this editor that he would likely become America's "first political prisoner" from the Internet

:rotfl: Oh please tell me you're just joking??

If not, you need to at least learn to do a basic "whois" and "traceroute" before spreading government generated lies about Julian and Wikileaks....seriously.

Cyptome.org is WELL KNOWN Cointelpro ...in fact, it's hosted at the SAME IP as US Treasury Department websites. It's designed to fool only the lamest of the lame. :O

moneyfactory.com
US Department of the Tresury- Bureau of Engraving and Printing

a 205.178.145.65

United States
vux.bos.netsolhost.com205.178.145.0/24
AS6245
INTERNIC InterNIC Registration Services
ns-soa ns47.worldnic.com
4 days old
205.178.190.24
United States
205.178.160.0/19
ns ns47.worldnic.com
4 days old
205.178.190.24
United States
ns48.worldnic.com
86 days old
205.178.144.24
United States
205.178.144.0/24
Proxy-registered route object
AS19871


cryptome.org
By $25 or more generous donation for two DVDs of the Cryptome 14-year archive from June 1996 to April 2010. The archive contains about 56,300 files (~8.5GB) published on Cryptome.org and its related sites along with the companion site Cartome.org and US Army INSCOM Dossiers of about 25,000 pages.

a 205.178.145.65

United States
vux.bos.netsolhost.com205.178.145.0/24
AS6245
INTERNIC InterNIC Registration Services
ns-soa ns47.worldnic.com
4 days old
205.178.190.24
United States
205.178.160.0/19
ns ns47.worldnic.com
4 days old
205.178.190.24
United States
ns48.worldnic.com
86 days old
205.178.144.24
United States
205.178.144.0/24
Proxy-registered route object
AS19871
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Gonzo said:
I highly doubt that anyone in WL has achieved such a level of protection.

Wonder if they'd think the same thing about FOTCM?

They seem stuck in the mechanics of ordinary reality, fighting the man, oblivious to the hyperdimensional controls, including time travel and thought projection capacities.

Wonder if they'd think the same thing about SOTT?

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Wonder if I'll ever stop trying to erect billboards along that highway??

To think WL is above such control or affect is wishful thinking and makes one food and a vector possibility.

Wonder how long it takes to turn "wishful thinking" into a functional reality...while attempting to remain unpalatable of course?
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks


Guardian said:
Cyptome.org is WELL KNOWN Cointelpro

I would not be surprised that any group publishing leaks is an asset of intel and mind control apparatus used for
psychological warfare operations. My comments regarding Julian Assange and Wikileaks and your comment regarding
Cyptome.org can be understood by your earlier point and Anart's reply.

Anart said:
g said:
I try not to... It does get a bit murky when the controllers start fighting among themselves. Shocked

That's a great point, actually - there are controllers who work at cross-purposes and it can get really complicated to figure out which witch is which. One can often only begin to tell the same way you can tell the wind is blowing - you see the movement of the trees, not the wind itself.

It looks like a hurricane around Wikileaks, the last few weeks. ;)
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

go2 said:
Guardian said:
Cyptome.org is WELL KNOWN Cointelpro

I would not be surprised that any group publishing leaks is an asset of the intel and mind control apparatus used for psychological warfare operations. My comments regarding Julian Assange and Wikileaks and your comment regarding
Cyptome.org can be understood by your earlier point and Anart's reply.

The big difference between the two is that cyptome.org is sitting on a server owned by the US Government, and Wikileaks is hosted on independent, average geek owned servers in several dozen different countries.

I think the one essential element that sets Wikileaks apart from other whistle-blower sites (including those owned by government/corp orgs) and journalists, etc. is the fact that Wikileaks doesn't say "Trust Us" anywhere on the site... in fact, they give detailed instructions on how not to trust them.

Everyone else claims they will "protect their sources" ...only Wikileaks says "Don't tell us who you are."
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks


Hi Guardian.

Any difference between Cyptome.org and Cryptome.org or is that a typo?
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

go2 said:
Hi Guardian.

Any difference between Cyptome.org and Cryptome.org or is that a typo?

That's a typo..... sorry, I meant "Cryptome.org" :oops:
 
Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Gonzo said:
One easy way to discredit an entire body of research is to point out minor errors in information supporting an argument, even if the flaw has no bearing on the validity.

Gonzo's quote seems applicable to Guardian's posts above. The likely existence of intelligence agencies using anonymous web sites as assets to place selected material is almost a certainty. The near certainty that sites such as Wikileaks and Cryptome are used and promoted, perhaps without their complicity, is not addressed. Guardian would you care to comment on your support for Wikileaks and if you are advancing this support by using the technique of argument noted by Gonzo on the "Israel attacks Gaza thread".

I could be wrong in my assessment and wish to check my perception as it is often wrong. I have been attempting to refine my reading and seeing accuracy and this seems like an opportunity to check my judgement. I want to make it clear I not attacking you Guardian, but I have arrived at a point in the Work where it has become difficult to trust myself and my judgement. Many of the old automatic responses and views have turned out to be nothing more than seeing reality through a keyhole.

Thanks Guardian! :)
 
Back
Top Bottom