Cryptome founder:"Wikileaks is a fraud"

[AhabsOtherLeg]

There's absolutely nothing Larouchie about suggesting somebody is a secret British agent.

[wintler2]

..
Do you read the aangirfan site? .. anti-semitism, .. Tunisia and Libya and pretty much every other revolution and popular movement to be nothing more than CIA operations.
..

So, another site pushing that mix. We should start a list, see how many there are out there.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Um...[cyber-framed and deployed] Bradley Manning and a zillion memos.

not

David Manning's memo on illegal war. Get it? Decoy conduit.

[jingofever]

Um...[cyber-framed and deployed] Bradley Manning and a zillion memos.

not

David Manning's memo on illegal war. Get it? Decoy conduit.

Don't worry, nobody had them confused.

[Stephen Morgan]

There's absolutely nothing Larouchie about suggesting somebody is a secret British agent.

Ah, barracuda works for her majesty the Queen (Gawd bless 'er). Hence his attachment to his boss's English, even to the detriment of his covert persona.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

There's absolutely nothing Larouchie about suggesting somebody is a secret British agent.

Ah, barracuda works for her majesty the Queen (Gawd bless 'er)

Don't we all, old bean, in one way or another. Whether we know it or nay?

'Course we do. What what.

Hence his attachment to his boss's English, even to the detriment of his covert persona.

The fuck kind of English is that?

[Stephen Morgan]

There's absolutely nothing Larouchie about suggesting somebody is a secret British agent.

Ah, barracuda works for her majesty the Queen (Gawd bless 'er)

Don't we all, old bean, in one way or another. Whether we know it or nay?

'Course we do. What what.

Maybe in Scotland, but down here she works for us.

Hence his attachment to his boss's English, even to the detriment of his covert persona.

The fuck kind of English is that?

Proper English, is that, not like what all these German royalses speaks.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

There's absolutely nothing Larouchie about suggesting somebody is a secret British agent.

Ah, barracuda works for her majesty the Queen (Gawd bless 'er)

Don't we all, old bean, in one way or another. Whether we know it or nay?

'Course we do. What what.

Maybe in Scotland, but down here she works for us.

That's a very controversial position to take, Stephen, which isn't like you at all.

The truth is actually the reverse - in England the Westminster Parliament is sovereign over all, but still requires the consent of the Crown to pass it's laws and bills and so on, but in Scotland, due to the 1689 Claim of Right, and the much later 1988 version, the people are sovereign over all and (technically) do not require the consent of any Crown (or even Parliament) to govern themselves as they see fit. This is why Elizabeth II is Queen of England and the United Kingdom, ie. the countries themselves, their property, and their lands - whereas Mary, back in the day, due to the Claim of Right 1689, was Queen of Scots - the people themselves, who remain constitutionally sovereign above all Parliaments, Monarchs, and Nations.

In practical terms, of course, this means bugger all, and nobody cares. It's also a massive derail of the thread. But I like ranting about it every now and again because constitutionally it is true. Have to admit, though, that the British system of totally ignoring the constitutional arrangements of our nation wherever possible has served us all well. For the most part.

Proper English, is that, not like what all these German royalses speaks.

You were right, sorry. That was perfectly good English. Both bosses' and boss's are acceptable. My mistake.

[Plutonia]

Not sure where to put this but...

Apparently John Young/Cryptome's email account is with Co$ owned and operated Earthlink!! - just saw this tweet:

John Young
@Cryptomeorg John Young
@jamesrbuk Could you provide G file size, names and SHA1 for comparison with the z.gpg file on Cryptome: cryptome[at]earthlink.net.Thx much.

I mean, WTF?!

He must know the infosec problem with that?

[wintler2]

..He must know the infosec problem with that?

JY must have no problem with residing in a CoS tent, which is .. curious. Either a simple explanation or a smokescreen will emerge.

Either way, can we start a new thread for it? Cos JY is "cofounder" of Wikileaks in the same way I am cofounder of Microsoft, ergo this threads title is a lie, one of those lies that CIA etc have been pushing for years, can we not repeat it here for them, thanks.

[8bitagent]

The only Co$ person Ive ever met was at an anti war/911 truth rally in San Francisco. He seemed to be passionate about and know every detail of deep state shenanigans and history...yet was adament Co$ was against the powers that be/bad things on the planet. Seemed like a kind of hippyish bohemian guy, so it was a bit odd

[Plutonia]

The only Co$ person Ive ever met was at an anti war/911 truth rally in San Francisco. He seemed to be passionate about and know every detail of deep state shenanigans and history...yet was adament Co$ was against the powers that be/bad things on the planet. Seemed like a kind of hippyish bohemian guy, so it was a bit odd

8Bit, they were the original conspiracy theorists and they populate the milieu still, covert or otherwise. Check out back issues of their Freedom Magazine.

Wintler, I'll start another thread, as you suggest, with a link back to this one for back-story.

[Wombaticus Rex]

JY is "cofounder" of Wikileaks in the same way I am cofounder of Microsoft, ergo this threads title is a lie, one of those lies that CIA etc have been pushing for years, can we not repeat it here for them, thanks.

UH, YEAH. YUP. YES.

Fixed in the interest of Truthiness.

[FourthBase]

Been reading this thread since the inception but never saw fit to post up until now.

I find myself increasingly settling towards the position that Assange himself, and WikiLeaks as an organization, do not have to be active agents or even compromised in order for things to have played out like they did. Considering how fundamentally unknowable this main contention is, of Assange's true inner motivations, I find it of limited value. I honor the gut feelings of Alice and Lupercal and I value all their contributions, but I would like to address constructively why I disagree with you guys here.

You are 100% correct that the interpretation and media/gov spin on the cablegate revelations has been repeatedly and distinctively in support of existing foreign policy objectives. However, the machine that makes that possible functions on it's own. It is huge, it is over a century old, and it will digest anything -- any dissent, any legal actions, any artistic statement -- into sanitized psyops. (Observe how it treats Iran, or Chavez, or Castro.) It has never needed the complicity and cooperation of anyone to accomplish those ends. Now, I recognize that history is clear on this: the media Machine absolutely has had the complicity and cooperation of people who played the role of agent provocateur, often on a grand, decades-long scale, too!

We can't prove that about Assange, though. Yet. Honestly, it's not even a very strong case for implication, from where I'm sitting.

The history of these agents and "Assets" is also clear about something more troubling: that these people almost always have their own conflicting agendas, and an often hostile relationship with their "handlers" @ Master Control. Timothy Leary: undoubtedly a man who was involved with the CIA, but also living proof that working for the Company doesn't necessarily make you a Company Man.

I think there is a valid line to be drawn between the contents of the cables and the stories that have dominated the media discussion -- those are two very different things. This indicates the size, scope and power of the media machine we've been talking about, but it's also an indication that Assange is playing a more complex game than just, say....being in a Harley-Davidson shirt at the right place at the right time with the right lines about why the buildings collapsed. There is a great deal of genuinely damning material being released and given almost no media coverage. That might just be to muddy the waters, but it also complicates your case.

More fundamentally, though, the content of the cables that have been released have profound and undeniable real world EFFECTS. That is the most important element here, not Assange. I think this remains an amazingly huge and important ongoing story worth paying close attention to. In the context of the Grand Chessboard, I think the question of Assange's possible agent status are actually secondary to the ongoing, real world effects. Like, very secondary.

Just my $0.02 and I have no illusions about changing minds. Carry on.

Your two cents is priceless! Oh, and: Bump, nudge, etc.

[lupercal]

^ hey thanks for the bumping an old friend whoever you are. I was getting around to explaining why you have your head up your hole vis-a-vis Bergoglio but it'll have to wait a few more days. If after however long you've been here you still can't figure out when you're being lied to you're either a lost cause or you like being lied to, so I don't imagine having the obvious explained to you will do much good anyway. It rarely does.

Onward. . .