Julian Assange Discussion

[Guardian]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

26th Chaos Communication Congress
Here be dragons

WikiLeaks Release 1.0 Part 1 of 7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0i39Vs-h4XM&feature=related

That's a good talk, watched it awhile back. 480p version available here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zNFe1mQ6Tc

Kewl...for some reason the Sunshine Press version appears to be gone?

 

[ocean59]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Kewl...for some reason the Sunshine Press version appears to be gone?

Don't know, nor do I remember where I saw that vid originally. To find that link, I just searched wikileaks on youtube, and then sorted by view count to find the higher quality version I knew was out there. Collateral Murder (released on Sunshine Press' channel) is over 7 million views now I noticed.

 

[go2]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Edit: The following link provides valuable experience and analysis with COINTELPRO and how to spot the operators by Laura Knight-Jadczyk.
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/124490-How-to-Spot-COINTELPRO-Agents

Daniel Schmitt and Julian Assange tout the offshore banking industry as the model for an offshore bits industry in Iceland at the 26th Chaos Communications Congress. The offshore banking industry is a looting operation, laundering drug and intelligence agency funds. Are looting and intelligence operations the intention of Wikileaks offshore data industry? Do they plan to run a pirate psychological operation with zero accountability? Who are these people? Who is behind their operation? Who funds their jetset lifestyle?

The contention Assange is being searched for by the US gov is a laugh, he could be arrested in a minute if he wasn’t protected. He has access to the highest levels of EU parliament and travels the world picking and choosing the release of information for the good of mankind. Do you trust an anonymous secretive group of men with this kind of power over media and information? Even their names and lives appear to be fabrications with almost zero verifiable information available on their origins, their affiliations, and their intentions? Contrast Wikileak’s secrecy to the openness of Sott for example. The more I observe and search for information on Wikileaks the more I am convinced they are not to be trusted.

How do we reconcile their opportunism in Iceland(never let a crisis go unexploited) with their contention they wish well for mankind?

"Pentagon hunts Wikileaks founder in bid to stop website publishing leaked sensitive documents." the Daily Mail reports today. But, who is Wikileak's founder Julian Assange, and why does this supposedly rebel, whistle-blowing website have so many ties to the very well funded and established, pro-zionist world?

[…]

Wikileak won Amnesty International 2009 Media Award. AI insiders and outsiders alike declare that AI is not a politically neutral organization.....
Francis Anthony Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law.

Between 1988 and 1992 he was a member of the board of Amnesty International USA.
From 1991 to 1993 he was a legal advisor to the Palestine Liberation Organization.

Boyle says US and UK security services have infiltrated Amnesty International’s staff.
Here’s what he says about zionist control of Amnesty International...

"The israel lobby uses bribes and threats to control Amnesty-USA. And, since Amnesty-USA pays about 20% of the budget for Amnesty-England, the israeli lobby controls London too. I don’t know about direct zionist lobbying in England, but I do know that Amnesty supports the israeli party line on all issues, whether by commission or omission.

I got involved in Amnesty in 1982 while the israelis were invading Lebanon. Twenty thousand Lebanese people were being exterminated, but Amnesty-USA refused to do anything, because of its pro-israel bias. In fact, the only organization that protested the israelis was the American Friends Service Committee.

Because of my efforts to publicize israeli crimes in Lebanon, I was asked to attend the first meeting of what later became the Amnesty-USA Middle East coordination group. (This was before I got on general board.) The Middle East group is supposed to coordinate human rights work on the Middle East. I was one of its founders. When I gave a speech condemning israeli crimes in Lebanon, I made it clear that I wasn't speaking on behalf of Amnesty. Nonetheless, the israelis were so furious that they ordered the chair of the Amnesty board to have everyone to shun me, which they did completely. The main board didn't talk to me until late when I got elected to the board myself.

That election wasn't easy. Amnesty board members are supposed to be democratically elected, but a small clique of pro-israel people (who have held power for twenty years) controls the nominating process. There is, however, a kind of grassroots petition process to have other voices get nominated. Many of the general members were disgusted with Amnesty’s support of Israeli atrocities, so they nominated me for the board. This nominating petition process is difficult. You must get at least a hundred signatures that are all very carefully scrutinized, and the pro-israel clique throws up many hurdles. I fulfilled all requirements, but the pro-israel clique disqualified me anyway. Therefore I went to New York to file a lawsuit against Amnesty. On the day before I was to file the suit, Amnesty backed down and said I could run for the board. That’s how I got in.

In April 2002, israelis massacred 60 Palestinians in Jenin. The United Nations tried to investigate, but both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said there had been no massacre. This allowed Bush and Ariel Sharon to prevent any investigation.

According to the Marine Corps Times (May 31, 2002) U.S. Marines were in Jenin to watch the massacre. The Marines wanted to study how israelis do urban cleansing. Hence the USA was directly complicit in the Jenin nightmare.

Amnesty also refused to investigate the Sabra and Shatila massacres in Lebanon. Philip Habib (then U.S. Envoy to the Middle East) personally promised Arafat that if the PLO fighters abandoned the camps, then the U.S. would guarantee the protection of Palestinians. When the killing began, the U.S. embassy knew about it, but did nothing for 48 hours so the Phalangists, working for the israelis, could complete their massacre. The USA had a CIA agent at Sabra and Shatila – I’m not sure who it was. Anyway the USA knew the massacre was happening, and allowed it to continue. Then Amnesty said there had been no massacre.

Amnesty International is so big and so influential that its reports and investigations are cited everywhere, including the halls of Congress. For example, in the run-up to Bush Senior’s invasion of Kuwait (1990) there was going to be a debate in the U.S. Congress, and a vote. To support the invasion and the killing, Amnesty-London published the Hill & Knowlton lie that Iraqi soldiers were pulling Kuwaiti infants from incubators and throwing the infants on the floor. Amnesty-London knew it was a lie, but spread it anyway. Of the six votes in the U.S, Senate that passed the resolution to go to war, several of those senators said they were influenced by the Amnesty-London report.

Despite my best efforts while I was on the board, Amnesty International was the only human rights organization that refused to condemn apartheid in South Africa. No matter how hard we tried, no matter what we did, Amnesty would not condemn apartheid in South Africa, since the South African government was so closely tied to the israeli government.

In 1986, Amnesty supported right-wing death squads in Nicaragua. Amnesty issued a report that criticized the Sandinista government, and helped Reagan push another Contra Aid appropriation through a reluctant congress.

Today, Amnesty International-Venezuela supports Bush. When Bush’s attempted coup against Chavez failed in April 2002, Amnesty-Venezuela charged Chavez with “crimes against humanity.”

Amnesty has a separate chapter in Puerto Rico. Its members came to our USA convention. At a general meeting, I helped get the Amnesty-USA to adopt two resolutions dealing with the human rights abuses in Puerto Rico, plus the deplorable condition of Puerto Rican political prisoners in U.S. jails. Amnesty-Puerto Rico asked me to come to Puerto Rico and give the keynote address on the right of Puerto Rican political prisoners to be treated as prisoners of war. However, Amnesty-London and Amnesty-USA did everything possible to sabotage my trip to Puerto Rico, and my ability to give that keynote address.

What motivates Amnesty is not human rights, but turf battles, plus the quest for publicity, money, and new members. Amnesty only discusses human rights violations when the publicity helps the USA or israel.

The people who control the Amnesty board are extremely arrogant. “We are Amnesty International, the world's largest and most powerful human rights organization! We won the Nobel Peace Prize for our work! Therefore we do whatever we want.” Search your Lexis-Nexis database and see if Amnesty has ever issued a single apology for spreading the Kuwaiti dead babies lie. Amnesty knows it lied in order to help Bush Senior go to war, but the Amnesty board members don’t care.
Source: _http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/articles/article0004573.html

Seemingly diverse groups are putting on their pajamas and curling into the same bed. When we pull down the covers, we see that the Nobel Prize folks are endorsing Amnesty International's "work", bestowing upon them their highest honor, the Peace Prize. This is the same award that US president Barack Obama received. He was nominated for the award a mere two weeks after he took office.

 

[Beau]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has surfaced at the TED talks in Oxford:

http://gawker.com/5589271/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-surfaces-in-oxford

Several weeks ago, Wikileaks.org's founder Julian Assange went into hiding after reports suggested the Pentagon had launched a "manhunt" for him. Looks like he escaped their predator drones: He was a surprise guest at TEDGlobal in Oxford, England.

Looking as much the benevolent alien invader as always, Assange didn't say much about the supposed manhunt during a Q&A with TED founder Chris Anderson. According to CNN, Assange said he canceled three US appearances because of "unreasonable statements by U.S. officials in private that they may not follow the rule of law" in dealing with the super-secretive founder of the whistleblower website.

"I received advice from figures like [investigative reporter] Sy Hersh to exercise caution," Assange said, adding that U.S. officials have now adopted a "reasonable" attitude in private.

He did touch on the recent arrest of Wikileaks' most famous source: army intelligence specialist Bradley Manning. Assange again denied that Manning sent Wikileaks over 150,000 sensitive diplomatic cables in addition to that Iraq attack helicopter video, as he claims.

Assange's reappearance comes among speculation that Wikileaks' website is falling into disrepair. Perhaps this was meant to assuage critics. But the rumors won't die off until Wikileaks and Assange release their next high-profile leak. Let's see that Afghanistan air strike video.

Lots of embedded links at the link above too.

 

[ocean59]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Wanted by the CIA: The Man Who Keeps No Secrets
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/212265-Wanted-by-the-CIA-The-Man-Who-Keeps-No-Secrets

"I believe in facts about conspiracies," [Assange] says, choosing his words slowly. "Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It's important not to confuse these two. Generally, when there's enough facts about a conspiracy we simply call this news."

What about 9/11? "I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud."

Does anyone else find it odd that Assange of all people dismisses the events of 9/11 as not a real conspiracy?

 

[Laura]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Wanted by the CIA: The Man Who Keeps No Secrets
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/212265-Wanted-by-the-CIA-The-Man-Who-Keeps-No-Secrets

"I believe in facts about conspiracies," [Assange] says, choosing his words slowly. "Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It's important not to confuse these two. Generally, when there's enough facts about a conspiracy we simply call this news."

What about 9/11? "I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud."

Does anyone else find it odd that Assange of all people dismisses the events of 9/11 as not a real conspiracy?

That's exactly what I thought. That stood out like a sore thumb. And maybe that is the answer as to why this guy hasn't been iced by the entirely capable CIA? He's a distraction, Protocol 12 "controlled opposition" on steroids?

 

[Guardian]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Does anyone else find it odd that Assange of all people dismisses the events of 9/11 as not a real conspiracy?

Yes, it is odd...especially considering the heat Julian took for posting the 911 transcripts....THOUSANDS of them.
Of course Mathew Bell could be lying through his teeth about the entire interview....he certainly insults Julian often enough in his disjointed article to make me wonder.

Why would Julian suddenly pick this rumor rag smuck Bell to give a personal interview to? Why did Bell use a picture of Julian taken from a year old story in the Guardian? Why would Bell mention Julian's alleged son...something Julian has NEVER done?

 

[Guardian]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

That's exactly what I thought. That stood out like a sore thumb. And maybe that is the answer as to why this guy hasn't
been iced by the entirely capable CIA? He's a distraction, Protocol 12 "controlled opposition" on steroids?

Or maybe the PTB are waging a disinfo campaign against Julain in an attempt to drive a wedge between him and his supporters.

Why would Julian give an interview to a hack journalist who calls him insulting names and posts info about his child?

 

[Laura]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

That's exactly what I thought. That stood out like a sore thumb. And maybe that is the answer as to why this guy hasn't
been iced by the entirely capable CIA? He's a distraction, Protocol 12 "controlled opposition" on steroids?

Or maybe the PTB are waging a disinfo campaign against Julain in an attempt to drive a wedge between him and his supporters.

Why would Julian give an interview to a hack journalist who calls him insulting names and posts info about his child?

All that is possible so let's wait for more data.

 

[Guardian]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

That's exactly what I thought. That stood out like a sore thumb. And maybe that is the answer as to why this guy hasn't
been iced by the entirely capable CIA? He's a distraction, Protocol 12 "controlled opposition" on steroids?

Or maybe the PTB are waging a disinfo campaign against Julain in an attempt to drive a wedge between him and his supporters.

Why would Julian give an interview to a hack journalist who calls him insulting names and posts info about his child?

All that is possible so let's wait for more data.

Yeah....I want to believe in Julian, but I'm not putting a Wikileaks bumper sticker on my car.

 

[Laura]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Yeah....I want to believe in Julian, but I'm not putting a Wikileaks bumper sticker on my car.

One thing for sure: he's gotten a LOT, LOT, LOT of publicity lately. The "wanted" thing is really giving him cachet amongst the "conspiracy theorists."

It's kinda funny... back when the Pentagon Strike video came out which sent the cover-up machine into overdrive, resulting in the Popular Mechanics and Scientific American articles, in NO instance whatsoever was it ever referred to even though Carol Morello of the WaPo told me that it gave new life to the almost dead 9-11 truth movement. Not only was the video never mentioned in any of the propaganda, but any mention of sott was clearly, assiduously avoided. Then I read that passage in "Red Symphony" where the agent is saying that the PTB NEVER give attention to anything they want buried because they KNOW that doing so just gives it impetus and speed.

And, if you notice, sott.net is still, and always, ignored though we have produced some of the best work on the topic out there. Our ideas have been stolen and twisted and published by others over and over again with nary a hat-tip or link. By sheer grit and determination we manage to stay on google.

One thing I notice in particular is "alternative" sites and people that do NOT link to us or mention us ever - as though there is some rule that you can't. I have a theory that those folks that don't, but who claim to be "9-11 truthers" are, in fact, not. They are part of the disinfo.

Anyway, knowing that it is impossible for any real truth to be revealed without hard work, and only at a grass roots level, I'm highly suspicious of anyone who gets as much publicity as the wikileaks guy.

 

[Guardian]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

And maybe that is the answer as to why this guy hasn't been iced by the entirely capable CIA?

It's also possible that he's set up a "dead man's switch" where if he gets killed EVERYTHING that's ever been submitted to Wikileaks gets dumped onto multiple servers?

 

[Guardian]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Anyway, knowing that it is impossible for any real truth to be revealed without hard work, and only at a grass roots level, I'm highly suspicious of anyone who gets as much publicity as the wikileaks guy.

Me too...but then I think of the kind of publicity he could be getting if he wanted it. He could certainly "cash in" at this point, in a multitude of ways...and he hasn't yet. If nothing else, the man is not materialistic. He's got a chunky ego...true enough, but who could survive what he's trying to do without one?

Then again, I've seen people change...you can know someone for 10-15 years or more, then all of the sudden, they're not the person you once knew...or thought you did :(

Like you say, with all the disinfo flying around...we'll just have to wait and see what he actually does. The entire submission site was just rewritten because there were fears it had been/might be compromised. The whole network is being revamped prior to the release of data the US government seems right nervous about.

 

[Nawd]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

I did see a rather effective way to get those off....

Perhaps there is a leak out there, that is being distracted from, that can not be brought to the attention of the searching public - so that the attention is elsewhere.

Wow, why it this sounding like the BP thing?

That's exactly what I thought. That stood out like a sore thumb. And maybe that is the answer as to why this guy hasn't
been iced by the entirely capable CIA? He's a distraction, Protocol 12 "controlled opposition" on steroids?

Or maybe the PTB are waging a disinfo campaign against Julain in an attempt to drive a wedge between him and his supporters.

Why would Julian give an interview to a hack journalist who calls him insulting names and posts info about his child?

All that is possible so let's wait for more data.

Yeah....I want to believe in Julian, but I'm not putting a Wikileaks bumper sticker on my car.

 

[ocean59]

Re: Soldier Betrayed by Online Informant with Wikileaks

Why would Julian give an interview to a hack journalist who calls him insulting names and posts info about his child?

This made me look at the interview a little more closely. And agreed that this dude is a total hack - his writing style is a little too self-smitten for my tastes.

It's also possible that he's set up a "dead man's switch" where if he gets killed EVERYTHING that's ever been submitted to Wikileaks gets dumped onto multiple servers?

Haha, like that movie Patrick Stewart starred in, Safe House? Now that would be a truly awesome twist to this story. :D

[...]even though Carol Morello of the WaPo told me that it gave new life to the almost dead 9-11 truth movement. Not only was the video never mentioned in any of the propaganda, but any mention of sott was clearly, assiduously avoided. Then I read that passage in "Red Symphony" where the agent is saying that the PTB NEVER give attention to anything they want buried because they KNOW that doing so just gives it impetus and speed.

That is really cool to hear the tidbit about just how big a role the Strike video played. Maybe someone should "re-leak" that video to Assange's site and see what happens. ;)

Anyway, knowing that it is impossible for any real truth to be revealed without hard work, and only at a grass roots level, I'm highly suspicious of anyone who gets as much publicity as the wikileaks guy.

I agree - that he is receiving such a quantity of seemingly 'unbiased' press coverage and support, it is definitely beginning to look a little suspicious, and perhaps almost a little obvious at this point.

It is an interesting movie, and will be interesting to see what the next scene brings. Popcorn, anyone? :)