Wikileaks

Not really. Liberals like to tout this line to try and justify taking down wikileaks, but the big bad terrorists aren't going to kill any more or less people upon hearing stuff they already know. U.S soldiers kill kids and innocents? STOP THE PRESSES.

'All proofs' are coming from ex wikileaks members, and a few websites. I mean really, Assange has absolutely nothing to gain from making a deal with Israel.

 

Family of spainish cameraman who was killed by a M1 Abrams tank shelling in a baghdad hotel gets proof, from leaked cables, of conspiracy by the americans to have the case dismissed. The family has filed a complaint with the spainish courts. At least the cables are letting people have a little closer.

 

Not without proof. They left the group obviously under negative terms, and for unknown reasons.

Money for what? The man spends most of his time moving from country to country, and wikileaks is publicly funded. Unless Israel is going to give him different types of currency, which would be easily noticeable.

The very idea that a man attacking every major country would leave one minor country, which also is a vessal for American hegemony in the middle east, is just absurd unless there's evidential proof. Which there is not. If such information appears, then nobody is going to be trusting wikileaks again. And on that note, Assange would have to be plain stupid to do such a thing, knowing it would obviously become known to the public. Anything he could gain would be rendered redundant.

 

Never place anything or anyone on a pedestal beyond reproach, question everything!

 

I'm not. However, I find the idea that he would do such a thing to be bizarre, considering how he has nothing to gain.

 

I agree, and for the most part I have been behind him in support, but I also find it bizarre that more than half of his staff have moved on because they feel he has betrayed what they set out to do and want to continue without him...?

 

Well like I said, Assange stated they wouldn't release documents which could harm the public. Maybe these guys were too idealistic. Maybe they weren't getting paid enough. Or they thought he was becoming too much of a celebrity rather than being a spokesman. Who knows, it could be hundreds of reasons. In any case it seems rather fruitless to split the organisation up.

 

Inre: the whole cut a deal with Israel thing, I don't know I'm yet to see credible sources for such claims.
Saw this though: www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/12/470066.html
which only managed to misquote Assange and ex-wikileak staffers, which doesn't exactly make one more confident in these claims.

 

he could not foresee a leak about his own greed...oh the irony

 

This is a man who is bringing some sort of transparency to a horribly corrupt world, of course people are going to trust him. Obviously that comment was aimed at me. I can assure you I have no heroes, unless Batman counts, and that is a made up character.

The fuck kind of proof I need is proof, buddy. If I were in a group with someone and I left the group under unknown circumstances, then told some unknown french site that I left because that person had accepted a bribe without any proof other than my word, would you accept that? Of course not. If however, these people could prove that Israel gave money to Assange then that would be acceptable proof.

My point is that Israel isn't the sort of country one strikes a deal with, especially concerning issues of government cables. And that's another thing that makes this complete nonsense. The US and Israel are very close politically. If Israel were to strike a deal, the United States would know about it, and they'd certainly run it in all newspapers.

Documents from Israel. Bank account details, anything more than a French website with citations of disgruntled ex compatriots. I don't know what you judge to be good enough evidence, but that doesn't wash with me my friend.

Okay. Consider for one moment that you are a man who travels the world, barely staying in one place for a long period. You're hated by every state in the world. What the hell use is large amounts of money going to be to you? Are you going to buy a nice house and a flash car? That would be almost as dumb as accepting bribes and expecting that it wouldn't be leaked. Regardless of whether or not I revere Assange, I that would be of value to him would be a country that would refuse to extradite him. Israel would not be one of those countries, but even if they were he would be almost as stupid as accepting a bribe to co to a country such as Israel, out of all the countries in the world. And if it's money the guy was looking for, why not go to other countries? China, Russia, America, Britain and cut a deal with them? It would be a billion times easier and more sensible to do that.

Though maybe i'm wrong, and Assange has the mental intelligence of a chimp.

 

That doesn't make a difference.

Again, proof. The word of these people is not proof just because they say it is.

I see. Regardless, if this news actually was seen to have any base, the American press would run with it.

Uh. I have, thanks and I don't recall people wanted by America to be cutting deals with Israel.

Israel is owned by America, most of it's policies are governed by the United States, anyone who can read, even badly, knows this. Even if Israel were to pointlessly betray the US's interests, something like this would get out.

No of course not. I think this money doesn't exist.


They could use wikileaks


Government members would surely pass this on to America. As you said, money corrupts, and information like Assange cutting deals would be worth more than Israel would ever pay to shut him up.

Maybe they wanted money. Maybe he was getting all the women at the club and they wanted some of the action. Maybe blahblahblah. There could be an endless number of reasons why they would say this. But you know what I find hilarious? Someone who criticises me for 'worshipping Assange, when you're believing the word of ex members based solely on their word.

The man has supporters everywhere. It would be easier and safer to accept untraceable donations than to Cut a deal with Israel. What are they going to do? give him millions of every currency in the world? Now that would be very fucking traceable my friend. If Israel randomly bought money form all over the world, you wouldn't even need documents.

Do you think this guy is a moron? Because only a person of sub intelligence would do something this dumb.

 

And by the way, the only person I can find who has quit wikileaks is John Young, who called wikileaks a CIA conduit. And that was three years ago.

I also did some small research on your 'very serious website', and it has been accused of fabricating information various times.

Edit: Using my bad knowledge of french, I read that webpage, and what I can gather, An Arabic investigative journalist group (obviously they would have no political agenda..) released this information, and they have a video of the interaction of Assange and the Israelis. Well excellent, let's see the video! Oh wait, there is none because it probably doesn't exist.

Edit2: The Arab journalist organisation is called al-haqiqa. Al, as we all know is a prefix similar the the word the in English, Haqiqa meaning something along the lines of knowledge from the word of God. Obviously trustworthy information from trustworthy websites here.

 

Dunno who's right here, but I think the whole story has gone much too far to take anything about it for "true", I think we can agree that the respective secret (intelligence?) agencies already have their claws in the case - so what message of the media is reliable and what message is a launched act of disinformation?
The arguments and differences between Assange and some of his fellow leakers were already mentioned in an interview in the summer - ol'gobbledigooks is still searching for it, the main dissents mentioned were the publishing of "clear names" of agents and people involved in government crimes and the problems to finance the site - so the separation of the german co-workers may have been predictable anyhow.
Personally I would like to regard wikileaks further as one reason for hope in all this shit, but:

And on the other hand, maybe it's better to have more than one whistleblower, there are already a handful of other sites less known and less present in the media, open leaks will be the next - and the more of them there are, the less targettable a certain one will be.

 

I'm certainly no Assange fanboy, I've not bothered going to any of the 'support Assange & wikileaks' protests or anything, moreover, the whole uncritical way in which claims of sexual assault are being either wholly rejected or downplayed by those on the 'left' over here in Melbz makes me rather uncomfortable. Either way, I'm yet to read anything that proves, to me, the claims that Israel paid off Assange, I make no judgment either way, I would just like moar sauces.

 

In other news, I assume this is due to Wikileaks:

Contra Chávez y los mapuches

OR via google translate:

 

More sauce with that here, here & here