Discussion: WikiLeaks

I'm going to remain ambivilent to him until someone gets hurt due to his leakage.

If all he is right now is causing the government to pitch a fit, I'm all for him. It's when his actions start creating collateral damage that I stop find this amusing.
 
Nope, which is why most tinfoil hats think that he's part of "the conspiracy" rather than a response against it.

At the same time, you cannot discount the possibility of that, because it's been discussed before. Problem-reaction-solution. Create a problem, react (U.S forced to shake up embassies around the world in lieu of Wikileaks) and drive toward a solution that was the end game all along. Like I said, "events" like this have been proposed before, in much more horrifying examples like, once again, Operation Northwoods.

I don't understand how any rational thinking person can know of that plan and still believe that the government wouldn't be capable of something like this. This is child's play in comparison. Their stated plan, their plan read like this, and you can fill in the blanks with whatever "enemy" you need it to be:

"The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible (fill in the blank) and to develop an international image of a (fill in the blank) threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere.

a. We could blow up a US ship in (blank) and blame (blank).


b. We could blow up a drone (unmanned) vessel anywhere in (blank). We could arrange to cause such incident in the vicinity of (blank) or (blank) as a spectacular result of (blank) attack from the air or sea, or both. The presence of (blank)planes or ships merely investigating the intent of the vessel could be fairly compelling evidence that the ship was taken under attack. The nearness to (blank) or (blank) would add credibility especially to those people that might have heard the blast or have seen the fire. The US could follow up with an air/sea rescue operation covered by US fighters to "evacuate" remaining members of the non-existent crew. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.


It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a (blank) aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner en route from the United States to (wherever). The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross (blank). The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.


a. An aircraft at (blank) would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.


b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of (blank). From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at (blank) where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over (blank) the drone will begin transmitting on the international distress frequency a "MAY DAY" message stating he is under attack by (blank). The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident."
Those are not my words, those are the words of the GOVERNMENT. I didn't make that up. In that scenario, it was Cuba, but you see it can easily interchanged with anything that they want it to be. Iraq, Iran, Saddam Hussein, bin Laden, Castro, etc,etc. It doesn't matter what the cost is, they can create a problem that garners a reaction starting with an outcry for a solution from the public. That's just an excerpt that I posted. It gets even more disturbing when they talk about holding mock funerals for soldiers that have been killed by this invisible attack in order to get more public support along with a wave of ******** national pride.
 
Last edited:
I'm going to remain ambivilent to him until someone gets hurt due to his leakage.

If all he is right now is causing the government to pitch a fit, I'm all for him. It's when his actions start creating collateral damage that I stop find this amusing.


There is a part of me that agrees with you.....and the fact that I am a big proponent of free speech. BUT, I think there are more problems that will be caused by this than people dieing......I think that it has done damage to our foreign policy that cannot be fixed, and we will be seeing the damage manifest itself in many areas.
 
He's an anarchist punk. He probably plans on releasing his "info bomb" to the public anyway, and he's just waiting for an excuse to do it.



Nope, which is why most tinfoil hats think that he's part of "the conspiracy" rather than a response against it.

Off topic, but did anyone catch a new show on History channel? About nwo and freemasons. The Freemasons HQ in Washington, DC is impressive looking. Of course the freemasons said 'Oh no, we are good.' Like 33rd degree Masons would admit to having plans of evil on a tv show. C'mon now. But I will say, with no leaks mentioning NWO...I'm starting to side with Masons. Mark Dice will be on a eppy of this show on the 16th or so.
 
So....UFO...suppose to be mentioned in upcoming wikileaks cables. Eh...ok..still not seeing NWO stuff.
 
Off topic, but did anyone catch a new show on History channel? About nwo and freemasons. The Freemasons HQ in Washington, DC is impressive looking. Of course the freemasons said 'Oh no, we are good.' Like 33rd degree Masons would admit to having plans of evil on a tv show. C'mon now. But I will say, with no leaks mentioning NWO...I'm starting to side with Masons. Mark Dice will be on a eppy of this show on the 16th or so.

I caught that show tonight. It was stupid. Besides, all of History Channel's shows are staged except the few documentaries they produce.
 
A letter from Mr Assange himself, posted today in The Australian

"Don't shoot messenger for revealing uncomfortable truths"


WIKILEAKS deserves protection, not threats and attacks.

IN 1958 a young Rupert Murdoch, then owner and editor of Adelaide's The News, wrote: "In the race between secrecy and truth, it seems inevitable that truth will always win."

His observation perhaps reflected his father Keith Murdoch's expose that Australian troops were being needlessly sacrificed by incompetent British commanders on the shores of Gallipoli. The British tried to shut him up but Keith Murdoch would not be silenced and his efforts led to the termination of the disastrous Gallipoli campaign.

Nearly a century later, WikiLeaks is also fearlessly publishing facts that need to be made public.
I grew up in a Queensland country town where people spoke their minds bluntly. They distrusted big government as something that could be corrupted if not watched carefully. The dark days of corruption in the Queensland government before the Fitzgerald inquiry are testimony to what happens when the politicians gag the media from reporting the truth.

These things have stayed with me. WikiLeaks was created around these core values. The idea, conceived in Australia, was to use internet technologies in new ways to report the truth.

WikiLeaks coined a new type of journalism: scientific journalism. We work with other media outlets to bring people the news, but also to prove it is true. Scientific journalism allows you to read a news story, then to click online to see the original document it is based on. That way you can judge for yourself: Is the story true? Did the journalist report it accurately?
Democratic societies need a strong media and WikiLeaks is part of that media. The media helps keep government honest. WikiLeaks has revealed some hard truths about the Iraq and Afghan wars, and broken stories about corporate corruption.

People have said I am anti-war: for the record, I am not. Sometimes nations need to go to war, and there are just wars. But there is nothing more wrong than a government lying to its people about those wars, then asking these same citizens to put their lives and their taxes on the line for those lies. If a war is justified, then tell the truth and the people will decide whether to support it.

If you have read any of the Afghan or Iraq war logs, any of the US embassy cables or any of the stories about the things WikiLeaks has reported, consider how important it is for all media to be able to report these things freely.

WikiLeaks is not the only publisher of the US embassy cables. Other media outlets, including Britain's The Guardian, The New York Times, El Pais in Spain and Der Spiegel in Germany have published the same redacted cables.

Yet it is WikiLeaks, as the co-ordinator of these other groups, that has copped the most vicious attacks and accusations from the US government and its acolytes. I have been accused of treason, even though I am an Australian, not a US, citizen. There have been dozens of serious calls in the US for me to be "taken out" by US special forces. Sarah Palin says I should be "hunted down like Osama bin Laden", a Republican bill sits before the US Senate seeking to have me declared a "transnational threat" and disposed of accordingly. An adviser to the Canadian Prime Minister's office has called on national television for me to be assassinated. An American blogger has called for my 20-year-old son, here in Australia, to be kidnapped and harmed for no other reason than to get at me.

And Australians should observe with no pride the disgraceful pandering to these sentiments by Julia Gillard and her government. The powers of the Australian government appear to be fully at the disposal of the US as to whether to cancel my Australian passport, or to spy on or harass WikiLeaks supporters. The Australian Attorney-General is doing everything he can to help a US investigation clearly directed at framing Australian citizens and shipping them to the US.

Prime Minister Gillard and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have not had a word of criticism for the other media organisations. That is because The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel are old and large, while WikiLeaks is as yet young and small.

We are the underdogs. The Gillard government is trying to shoot the messenger because it doesn't want the truth revealed, including information about its own diplomatic and political dealings.
Has there been any response from the Australian government to the numerous public threats of violence against me and other WikiLeaks personnel? One might have thought an Australian prime minister would be defending her citizens against such things, but there have only been wholly unsubstantiated claims of illegality. The Prime Minister and especially the Attorney-General are meant to carry out their duties with dignity and above the fray. Rest assured, these two mean to save their own skins. They will not.

Every time WikiLeaks publishes the truth about abuses committed by US agencies, Australian politicians chant a provably false chorus with the State Department: "You'll risk lives! National security! You'll endanger troops!" Then they say there is nothing of importance in what WikiLeaks publishes. It can't be both. Which is it?

It is neither. WikiLeaks has a four-year publishing history. During that time we have changed whole governments, but not a single person, as far as anyone is aware, has been harmed. But the US, with Australian government connivance, has killed thousands in the past few months alone.
US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates admitted in a letter to the US congress that no sensitive intelligence sources or methods had been compromised by the Afghan war logs disclosure. The Pentagon stated there was no evidence the WikiLeaks reports had led to anyone being harmed in Afghanistan. NATO in Kabul told CNN it couldn't find a single person who needed protecting. The Australian Department of Defence said the same. No Australian troops or sources have been hurt by anything we have published.

But our publications have been far from unimportant. The US diplomatic cables reveal some startling facts:

► The US asked its diplomats to steal personal human material and information from UN officials and human rights groups, including DNA, fingerprints, iris scans, credit card numbers, internet passwords and ID photos, in violation of international treaties. Presumably Australian UN diplomats may be targeted, too.
► King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia asked the US to attack Iran.
► Officials in Jordan and Bahrain want Iran's nuclear program stopped by any means available.
► Britain's Iraq inquiry was fixed to protect "US interests".
► Sweden is a covert member of NATO and US intelligence sharing is kept from parliament.
► The US is playing hardball to get other countries to take freed detainees from Guantanamo Bay. Barack Obama agreed to meet the Slovenian President only if Slovenia took a prisoner. Our Pacific neighbour Kiribati was offered millions of dollars to accept detainees.

In its landmark ruling in the Pentagon Papers case, the US Supreme Court said "only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government". The swirling storm around WikiLeaks today reinforces the need to defend the right of all media to reveal the truth.

Julian Assange is the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.

Noteworthy words. And true ones.
 
A letter from Mr Assange himself, posted today in The Australian

"Don't shoot messenger for revealing uncomfortable truths"


WIKILEAKS deserves protection, not threats and attacks.

IN 1958 a young Rupert Murdoch, then owner and editor of Adelaide's The News, wrote: "In the race between secrecy and truth, it seems inevitable that truth will always win."

His observation perhaps reflected his father Keith Murdoch's expose that Australian troops were being needlessly sacrificed by incompetent British commanders on the shores of Gallipoli. The British tried to shut him up but Keith Murdoch would not be silenced and his efforts led to the termination of the disastrous Gallipoli campaign.

Nearly a century later, WikiLeaks is also fearlessly publishing facts that need to be made public.
I grew up in a Queensland country town where people spoke their minds bluntly. They distrusted big government as something that could be corrupted if not watched carefully. The dark days of corruption in the Queensland government before the Fitzgerald inquiry are testimony to what happens when the politicians gag the media from reporting the truth.

These things have stayed with me. WikiLeaks was created around these core values. The idea, conceived in Australia, was to use internet technologies in new ways to report the truth.

WikiLeaks coined a new type of journalism: scientific journalism. We work with other media outlets to bring people the news, but also to prove it is true. Scientific journalism allows you to read a news story, then to click online to see the original document it is based on. That way you can judge for yourself: Is the story true? Did the journalist report it accurately?
Democratic societies need a strong media and WikiLeaks is part of that media. The media helps keep government honest. WikiLeaks has revealed some hard truths about the Iraq and Afghan wars, and broken stories about corporate corruption.

People have said I am anti-war: for the record, I am not. Sometimes nations need to go to war, and there are just wars. But there is nothing more wrong than a government lying to its people about those wars, then asking these same citizens to put their lives and their taxes on the line for those lies. If a war is justified, then tell the truth and the people will decide whether to support it.

If you have read any of the Afghan or Iraq war logs, any of the US embassy cables or any of the stories about the things WikiLeaks has reported, consider how important it is for all media to be able to report these things freely.

WikiLeaks is not the only publisher of the US embassy cables. Other media outlets, including Britain's The Guardian, The New York Times, El Pais in Spain and Der Spiegel in Germany have published the same redacted cables.

Yet it is WikiLeaks, as the co-ordinator of these other groups, that has copped the most vicious attacks and accusations from the US government and its acolytes. I have been accused of treason, even though I am an Australian, not a US, citizen. There have been dozens of serious calls in the US for me to be "taken out" by US special forces. Sarah Palin says I should be "hunted down like Osama bin Laden", a Republican bill sits before the US Senate seeking to have me declared a "transnational threat" and disposed of accordingly. An adviser to the Canadian Prime Minister's office has called on national television for me to be assassinated. An American blogger has called for my 20-year-old son, here in Australia, to be kidnapped and harmed for no other reason than to get at me.

And Australians should observe with no pride the disgraceful pandering to these sentiments by Julia Gillard and her government. The powers of the Australian government appear to be fully at the disposal of the US as to whether to cancel my Australian passport, or to spy on or harass WikiLeaks supporters. The Australian Attorney-General is doing everything he can to help a US investigation clearly directed at framing Australian citizens and shipping them to the US.

Prime Minister Gillard and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have not had a word of criticism for the other media organisations. That is because The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel are old and large, while WikiLeaks is as yet young and small.

We are the underdogs. The Gillard government is trying to shoot the messenger because it doesn't want the truth revealed, including information about its own diplomatic and political dealings.
Has there been any response from the Australian government to the numerous public threats of violence against me and other WikiLeaks personnel? One might have thought an Australian prime minister would be defending her citizens against such things, but there have only been wholly unsubstantiated claims of illegality. The Prime Minister and especially the Attorney-General are meant to carry out their duties with dignity and above the fray. Rest assured, these two mean to save their own skins. They will not.

Every time WikiLeaks publishes the truth about abuses committed by US agencies, Australian politicians chant a provably false chorus with the State Department: "You'll risk lives! National security! You'll endanger troops!" Then they say there is nothing of importance in what WikiLeaks publishes. It can't be both. Which is it?

It is neither. WikiLeaks has a four-year publishing history. During that time we have changed whole governments, but not a single person, as far as anyone is aware, has been harmed. But the US, with Australian government connivance, has killed thousands in the past few months alone.
US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates admitted in a letter to the US congress that no sensitive intelligence sources or methods had been compromised by the Afghan war logs disclosure. The Pentagon stated there was no evidence the WikiLeaks reports had led to anyone being harmed in Afghanistan. NATO in Kabul told CNN it couldn't find a single person who needed protecting. The Australian Department of Defence said the same. No Australian troops or sources have been hurt by anything we have published.

But our publications have been far from unimportant. The US diplomatic cables reveal some startling facts:

► The US asked its diplomats to steal personal human material and information from UN officials and human rights groups, including DNA, fingerprints, iris scans, credit card numbers, internet passwords and ID photos, in violation of international treaties. Presumably Australian UN diplomats may be targeted, too.
► King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia asked the US to attack Iran.
► Officials in Jordan and Bahrain want Iran's nuclear program stopped by any means available.
► Britain's Iraq inquiry was fixed to protect "US interests".
► Sweden is a covert member of NATO and US intelligence sharing is kept from parliament.
► The US is playing hardball to get other countries to take freed detainees from Guantanamo Bay. Barack Obama agreed to meet the Slovenian President only if Slovenia took a prisoner. Our Pacific neighbour Kiribati was offered millions of dollars to accept detainees.

In its landmark ruling in the Pentagon Papers case, the US Supreme Court said "only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government". The swirling storm around WikiLeaks today reinforces the need to defend the right of all media to reveal the truth.

Julian Assange is the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.

Noteworthy words. And true ones.
Excellent. Those in power will always take the piss if they can. The US government certainly is, with its own citizens as well as the world.
 
I would say the EU has been a bit more reckless with their handling of their countries than the US has been with the handling of the states.
 
Power corrupts. I can't believe that Canada's former government advisor actually said, on TV, that Assange should be assassinated. When Wikileaks exposed Kenyan police atrocities, they won awards. When you direct your gaze towards the US and European governments, you get accused of treason and are threatened with murder. "In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble." - Ron Paul.
 
I wonder how this will affect American relations overseas, especially when it comes to the Americans who are most popular with foreigners (Movie stars, musicians, some pro athletes depending on the sport).
 
No comments on Mr. Assange's arrest yet, huh?
 
They just made Assange becomes something he wasn't yesterday: a martyr.

WikiLeaks will continue to release material in its possession. They are on cable 301 and there are 250,000 secret cables.
 
He got arrested? More stuff will leak...didn't he send out 100,000 things to people? Sorry, brain fart. I meant didn't he send files to 100,000 Internet friends?
 
No comments on Mr. Assange's arrest yet, huh?

I think independent of what everyone may think of Wikileaks, that arrest for rape is looking more and more like a joke. Those two women that said they were raped, one of them threw a party for Assange in honor of him after she was allegedly raped. One of them, Anna Ardin, is a militant feminist with connections to the CIA and who also has a blog on getting revenge on cheating ex-boyfriend/husbands. You can't make this **** up.
 
He got arrested? More stuff will leak...didn't he send out 100,000 things to people? Sorry, brain fart. I meant didn't he send files to 100,000 Internet friends?

apparently he has some sort of information he and his lawyer are calling "the nuclear option", apparently its a load of very sensitive information that will be released if anything untoward happens to Mr. Assange or Wikileaks
 
apparently he has some sort of information he and his lawyer are calling "the nuclear option", apparently its a load of very sensitive information that will be released if anything untoward happens to Mr. Assange or Wikileaks
yep. its the insurance.aes256 file that thousands of ppl have downloaded and we're just waiting for them to release thew password (as they've said: if something serious should happen to WL or Assange, they'll release it) to open it :)
 
it's a 256 character password, if I read correctly.....damn

wonder what it is
 
it's a 256 character password, if I read correctly.....damn

wonder what it is
Yeah its about 1.35 GB also in size hehe, I figure it can be one of two things: either its ALL the 250k cables, or it could be the "really sweet and tasty candy" :devil:

heres hoping for the latter :awesome:
 
Is the sweet candy NWO or freemason related? I cannot imagine how the public would react. Would the military even listen to orders?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"