Assange Amazing Adventures of Captain Neo in Blonde Land.

[RocketMan]

Jack is correct about the thread title, btw... The entire conversation should be moved to the Wikileaks question thread.

[seemslikeadream]

funny I added that thread to this thread when Jack asked me to start this thread...fun times

sorry I didn't get his thread title approval at the time..I didn't know I had to do that

[JackRiddler]

Who here is demanding to get "this thread locked"? This is again utter insanity. I literally have no idea what you're talking about.

I'm not demanding it. I would totally change that title, if I were mod, but I'm not. SLAD's messed-up shitty responses may prompt a thread locking, but I don't want that necessarily. I think if SLAD is going to flood a lot of anti-Assange propaganda, it may as well be in a separate thread rather than messing up the good ones. I was having relatively little trouble ignoring this shite of a thread otherwise. I wish I had not peeked in here and caught her in such a blatant lie.

She could always admit that this was a lie:

WikiLeaks withheld a US military document that proves the U.S. never had any intention of "regime change" in Syria, and that, in fact, it wants the Alawite-Baathist regime to stay in power.

Fact: Wikileaks provided the document. No one else did that. Wikileaks published the document soon after they received it in the Stratfor data dump. Otherwise you would not know the document existed. Otherwise Nafeez would not have been able to use it in his article.

.

[RocketMan]

Well, I'm glad there's the one thread with the neutral name. This personality driven drama is exhausting. As are the underhanded, plausibly deniable digs at Assange.

Again, what is unfolding now is EXACTLY WHY HE WANTED POLITICAL ASYLUM. And when he went in the embassy it was derided as unhinged paranoia. I am used to dealing with this sort of historical amnesia in the general population but HERE it is just... it's tiring.

*sigh*

[seemslikeadream]

Elvis would you please lock this thread...52 pages and Jack after reading this whole thread, every single word, has found one sentence that is incorrect so it must be locked. He has accused me of "1001 indirect falsehoods or possible delusions" without one single piece of evidence only his interpretation ...he has said this is "A THREAD FULL OF LIES" he lies about me all the while accusing me of lying. So there is nothing left to say after 9 years. I do not want this to continue and there is only one way to stop it, please lock this thread

Thank you

[JackRiddler]

What is wrong with you?

You could just acknowledge your statement was false and call it an error. You still haven't spoken to it. You could have done so pages ago. Do you need some martyrdom?

[seemslikeadream]

.

That may well be true. If so, why has Mueller avoided all that and produced an exoneration?

.

you post that Mueller has exonerated trump, that is not true but I will not call you a liar, I will not spend all afternoon hounding you about it I will not post it a dozen times .... it is your opinion but it is wrong. I did address your concerns already. Now you have to correct the mistake you made or not. At the very same time you are insisting I correct the record you do the very same thing only you are "misrepresenting" the Mueller report but that ok just so you keep an eye on me for "misrepresenting" Wikileaks

have you read the whole Redacted Mueller report? How did you come to that inaccurate/incorrect conclusion

[stickdog99]

The current dispute on this thread neatly illustrates how comparatively petty personal and political differences are being used by our corporate media to promote the ever increasing criminalization of the public disclosure of oligarchic mendacity and criminality, which has been ever increasingly shrouded by false claims of both property rights and national security classification.

Citizens have a basic right to know the vast majority of the information that whistle blowers have served and are currently serving time (or "enjoying" asylum) for merely disclosing to the public. The true crimes are what was exposed and certainly not their disclosure.

Wouldn't it be far better for all of us if we lived in a world in in which, for example, Seth Rich's putative disclosure of the DNC's emails were considered a heroic act of whistle blowing rather than a crime whose "accusation" requires a posthumous apology?

[seemslikeadream]

Seth Rich did not disclose the DNC emails, why did you say that?

be careful Jack's on watch he doesn't like misrepresenting things

[RocketMan]

Seth Rich did not disclose the DNC emails, why did you say that?

be careful Jack's on watch he doesn't like misrepresenting things

Assange did not interface with the GRU, why do you keep saying that?

That is a blanket statement for which there is no evidence backing it up. It is simply impossible to comprehensively state that Seth Rich DID NOT leak the e-mails.

The entire edifice of the Assange conspired with the Russkies to hack the Clinton e-mails case rests on the assertion of state organs supposedly based on secret evidence that Guccifer 2.0 is a Russian government front. That's it.

[seemslikeadream]

Julian Assange not only knew that a murdered Democratic National Committee staffer wasn’t his source for thousands of hacked party emails, he was in active contact with his real sources in Russia’s GRU months after Seth Rich’s death. At the same time he was publicly working to shift blame onto the slain staffer “to obscure the source of the materials he was releasing,” Special Counsel Robert Mueller asserts in his final report on Russia’s role in the 2016 presidential election.

“After the U.S. intelligence community publicly announced its assessment that Russia was behind the hacking operation, Assange continued to deny that the Clinton materials released by WikiLeaks had come from Russian hacking,” the report reads. “According to media reports, Assange told a U.S. congressman that the DNC hack was an ‘inside job,’ and purported to have ‘physical proof’ that Russians did not give materials to Assange.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/mueller-r ... r-russians

[RocketMan]

That Daily Beast article is atrocious. Again, the whole house of cards is based on bald assertions by the national security state.

[seemslikeadream]

“As laid out by Mueller, Assange’s involvement in Russia’s election interference began with a June 14, 2016 direct message to WikiLeaks’ Twitter account from “DC Leaks,” one of the false fronts created by the Russians to launder their hacked material.

“You announced your organization was preparing to publish more Hillary's emails,” the message read, according to Mueller’s report. “We are ready to support you. We have some sensitive information too, in particular, her financial documents. Let's do it together. What do you think about publishing our info at the same moment? Thank you.”

A week later, WikiLeaks reached out to a second GRU persona, Guccifer 2.0, and pitched WikiLeaks as the best outlet for the hacked material. On July 14, 2016, GRU officers used a Guccifer 2.0 email address to send WikiLeaks an encrypted one-gigabyte file named “wk dnc link I .txt.gpg.” Assange confirmed receipt, and on July 22 he published 20,000 DNC emails stolen during the GRU’s breach.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4 ... an-Sources

[RocketMan]

How does that refute what I just said?

[seemslikeadream]

.

Just keep digging. I'd be thrilled to see this thread locked, or you to come to your senses and ask for the title to be changed. But it's not my motivation to post here, and thus kick this shitty storehouse of anti-Wikileaks propaganda.

I caught you lying. On a factual matter. Directly provable. Tough shit, that's what happened, and you will post a fucking encyclopedia of denial and dissembling rather than acknowledge it.

You could acknowledge the complete untruth of what you posted, and claim it was an error.

But until then, this is a lie and you are a liar:

WikiLeaks withheld a US military document that proves the U.S. never had any intention of "regime change" in Syria, and that, in fact, it wants the Alawite-Baathist regime to stay in power.

Fact: Wikileaks provided the document. No one else did that. Wikileaks published the document soon after they received it in the Stratfor data dump. Otherwise you would not know the document existed. Otherwise Nafeez would not have been able to use it in his article.

.

yes you did ...quit misrepresenting what happened ..if this is incorrect why have you left it go for 9 years ....you sure are the one to talk about "misrepresenting" things You just did the same twice today

Jack has asked me to combine the Assange threads, let's see if we can keep all posts Assange here, thanks.