It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Breaking: Julian Assange May be Arrested in Matter of Hours--Fox News. Wikileaks 11 Podesta Email R

page: 4
30
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: Annee

What proof do you have that Assange / Wikileaks are responsible for hacking into anything?



You're kidding, right?




posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

I'm kinda curious has to what proof you have that wikileaks has hacked anything that has been published by them.


+5 more 
posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

No, there is no kidding happening.

Wikileaks do not hack. They get information delivered to them, verify sources for the information, sift the contents to see if it ACTUALLY presents a national security threat, and publish what they can, at about the pace they can sift it. That's all. They do not spy, hack, steal, or commit espionage activities. They only distribute information they receive, and nothing more.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Your indignation here shows that you aren't really clued in on how wikileaks operates. You realize much of their source material is leaked to them by whistleblower types (a la the Apache gun camera footage) etc.

Hence - LEAKS.

Again - what proof do you have the Assange or wikileaks has hacked anything?



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: Annee

What proof do you have that Assange / Wikileaks are responsible for hacking into anything?



You're kidding, right?


No nobody is kidding. Wikileaks is simply an organization to promote transparency and reduce corruption they just release information. They at least claim they do not work to obtain it, and I have seen no evidence that they do.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: Annee

Your indignation here shows that you aren't really clued in on how wikileaks operates. You realize much of their source material is leaked to them by whistleblower types (a la the Apache gun camera footage) etc.

Hence - LEAKS.

Again - what proof do you have the Assange or wikileaks has hacked anything?



Assange changed his spots - - and now he's just a delivery man.

Sure he is.



In 1987 Assange began hacking under the name Mendax.] He and two others—known as "Trax" and "Prime Suspect"—formed a hacking group they called the International Subversives. During this time he hacked into the Pentagon and other US Department of Defense facilities, MILNET, the US Navy, NASA, and Australia's Overseas Telecommunications Commission; Citibank, Lockheed Martin, Motorola, Panasonic, and Xerox; and the Australian National University, La Trobe University, and Stanford University's SRI International. He is thought to have been involved in the WANK (Worms Against Nuclear Killers) hack at NASA in 1989, but he does not acknowledge this. In September 1991, Assange was discovered hacking into the Melbourne master terminal of Nortel, a Canadian multinational telecommunications corporation. The Australian Federal Police tapped Assange's phone line (he was using a modem), raided his home at the end of October, and eventually charged him in 1994 with 31 counts of hacking and related crimes. In December 1996, he pleaded guilty to 25 charges (the other six were dropped), was ordered to pay reparations of A$2,100 and released on a good behaviour bond, avoiding a heavier penalty due to the perceived absence of malicious or mercenary intent and his disrupted childhood. After the trial, Assange lived in Melbourne, where he survived on single-parent income support. en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee
So if you can't attack what is being presented....attack the presenter. Is this the tactic that you are using? How about speaking about what they have leaked. But it works out much better for you to attack Assange, right? I don't like him, but I will not snarl my nose at what he presents me with.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: lordcomac

It doesn't make sense to be arresting him now, since he announced a dead mans switch and released all that encrypted data... he has a gun pointed at their head and they're pulling the trigger? Something stinks.


Of course they should arrest him.

Something stinks? You mean like hacking into private military/political data?





I thought you said you were intelligent?

You do know what wiki leaks does, right?



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:19 PM
link   
He's always been just a "delivery man." That's how leaking works. All of this hostility towards Assange and Wikileaks is a classic example of shooting the messenger while ignoring the message.

If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at Hillary for allowing foreign nations to openly buy influence at the State Department. Or be mad at the MSM for abandoning any pretense of fairness and directly coordinating their reporting with the Democratic Party. Or be mad at the FBI and the DOJ for engaging in a cover-up of the e-mail scandal, instead of any kind of real investigation. Don't be mad at Assange for showing you the evidence that this stuff is all true.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
He's always been just a "delivery man." That's how leaking works. All of this hostility towards Assange and Wikileaks is a classic example of shooting the messenger while ignoring the message.

If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at Hillary for allowing foreign nations to openly buy influence at the State Department. Or be mad at the MSM for abandoning any pretense of fairness and directly coordinating their reporting with the Democratic Party. Or be mad at the FBI and the DOJ for engaging in a cover-up of the e-mail scandal, instead of any kind of real investigation. Don't be mad at Assange for showing you the evidence that this stuff is all true.


Like all authoritarian dictatorships, the current western govts will tell everyone that the real evil is them being exposed and not what they do. In any population, some people will believe them and act as their henchmen, whilst others will oppose.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Annee

No, there is no kidding happening.

Wikileaks do not hack. They get information delivered to them, verify sources for the information, sift the contents to see if it ACTUALLY presents a national security threat, and publish what they can, at about the pace they can sift it. That's all. They do not spy, hack, steal, or commit espionage activities. They only distribute information they receive, and nothing more.


Exactly, not that we should be too hard on actual hackers if they expose the total corruption at state level. As far as I am concerned no govt has the right to secrets beyond military movements and intel.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
He's always been just a "delivery man." That's how leaking works. All of this hostility towards Assange and Wikileaks is a classic example of shooting the messenger while ignoring the message.



Blind ignorance is something that protects people from hearing the truth.

And is against the ATS motto "Deny ignorance", but why not, sometimes the truth is overwhelming for people that can't handle it.





edit on 18-10-2016 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Witness2008
a reply to: MamaJ

Wikileaks publishes the files that are leaked to them, whether they are hacked or not. Would you prefer that he make up things in order to look unbiased to the biased eye?

There are plenty of files in the wikileaks archives that speak to every one of the things that you are accusing him of not having produced. Wikileaks publishes original un-doctored files that come from outside of wikileaks.



AGAIN.. you seem to be missing the point.

Every single word you say comes right off their site. I have NOT argued against that.

Just because I'm not an Assange fan and state I question his motives doesn't mean I am against him so there is no need to be defensive.


You state..



There are plenty of files in the wikileaks archives that speak to every one of the things that you are accusing him of not having produced


Show me these archives. Nothing he has produced regarding all that I mentioned are damning.

Show me this info he leaked regarding the FED, Rockefeller Foundation, 9/11 being an inside job. I have searched without any luck so I am OPEN to you showing me how he leaked about them too.

All he has done for the last 2 years is leak about Hillary. I'm over that witch. We all know she is corrupt so .... NEXT. What else ya got buddy?

This Country has over 100 years worth of pain and suffering the oil money has caused with all their ties and connections to the FED, FDA, CDC, Education, Science, Health, and more... leak that!!



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: MamaJ

The nature of being a destination for leaks means you can't actually control what you receive. That said, Wikileaks do ask plenty about other issues, for example the shenanigans around the revolt against Jeremy Corbyn.

The wikileaks site has several data dumps not about Hillary. You might be over Hillary but she is going to the next leader of the Western world. It is important to continue to expose her criminality so we can be prepared for 8 years of lying and corruption.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

You may not believe me when I tell you this but I will tell you anyway.

Hillary was destined for this time and it doesn't matter what is released, she has the invite, not Trump.

She will be the next POTUS no matter what. I said this years ago and have maintained my position.

I'm not voting for anyone and haven't since I learned the true nature of our world banks/government.

They live in another reality than you or I.

I question Assange's motives because I do not trust information is being "leaked" without prior knowledge and approval of said leaks. I don't trust anyone in the public eye right now and for very good reason.

These people including Julian has an agenda and I guarantee you his donations come with a price and the price isn't honesty.

I won't buy he is doing this to Hillary just because he doesn't like her. She gets a lot of attention from him and the attention hasn't hurt her.. it's helped her actually.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: MamaJ
a reply to: UKTruth

You may not believe me when I tell you this but I will tell you anyway.

Hillary was destined for this time and it doesn't matter what is released, she has the invite, not Trump.

She will be the next POTUS no matter what. I said this years ago and have maintained my position.

I'm not voting for anyone and haven't since I learned the true nature of our world banks/government.

They live in another reality than you or I.

I question Assange's motives because I do not trust information is being "leaked" without prior knowledge and approval of said leaks. I don't trust anyone in the public eye right now and for very good reason.

These people including Julian has an agenda and I guarantee you his donations come with a price and the price isn't honesty.

I won't buy he is doing this to Hillary just because he doesn't like her. She gets a lot of attention from him and the attention hasn't hurt her.. it's helped her actually.



I understand what you are saying, but I have not yet fully given up hope on people who have the right motivations.
I hold these words to be true, despite the different context; Do not go gentle into that good night.
edit on 18/10/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: MamaJ

Wikileaks publishes the files that are deposited with them. That's it. Assange has some very educated commentary on all of the millions of files that they have received. I take my news and commentary from them, as they seem to be the only publisher on the planet with the whole picture, along with an honest unbiased agenda.

Before casting out a critique of something, it may be wise to understand the thing that you critique.

We are not able to link directly to wikileaks here. I guess you will have to do your own digging. There is plenty of information on the banking industry and more than enough for anyone concerning 9-11. If you really spent time investigating , given how bright I believe you to be (having paid attention to your posting) you would have a better opinion of Wikileaks.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: Annee

Your indignation here shows that you aren't really clued in on how wikileaks operates. You realize much of their source material is leaked to them by whistleblower types (a la the Apache gun camera footage) etc.

Hence - LEAKS.

Again - what proof do you have the Assange or wikileaks has hacked anything?



Assange changed his spots - - and now he's just a delivery man.

Sure he is.



In 1987 Assange began hacking under the name Mendax.] He and two others—known as "Trax" and "Prime Suspect"—formed a hacking group they called the International Subversives. During this time he hacked into the Pentagon and other US Department of Defense facilities, MILNET, the US Navy, NASA, and Australia's Overseas Telecommunications Commission; Citibank, Lockheed Martin, Motorola, Panasonic, and Xerox; and the Australian National University, La Trobe University, and Stanford University's SRI International. He is thought to have been involved in the WANK (Worms Against Nuclear Killers) hack at NASA in 1989, but he does not acknowledge this. In September 1991, Assange was discovered hacking into the Melbourne master terminal of Nortel, a Canadian multinational telecommunications corporation. The Australian Federal Police tapped Assange's phone line (he was using a modem), raided his home at the end of October, and eventually charged him in 1994 with 31 counts of hacking and related crimes. In December 1996, he pleaded guilty to 25 charges (the other six were dropped), was ordered to pay reparations of A$2,100 and released on a good behaviour bond, avoiding a heavier penalty due to the perceived absence of malicious or mercenary intent and his disrupted childhood. After the trial, Assange lived in Melbourne, where he survived on single-parent income support. en.wikipedia.org...



You do realize that Mendax is like a Michael Jordan in the hacking world. Solo...Dennis Rodman lol Some even claim that Mendax can move satellites. This is not news to anyone. Assange CAN HACK with the best of them. But the point of contention here is, does Wikileaks hack information.

Maybe...

But does it really matter? And if it does...what then? We can condemn them. Admire them. Support them. Crucify them.

Then what?

Trump gets elected as POTUS that's what.

If that happens...then we ask the question again. Does it really matter?




posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Annee

No, there is no kidding happening.

Wikileaks do not hack. They get information delivered to them, verify sources for the information, sift the contents to see if it ACTUALLY presents a national security threat, and publish what they can, at about the pace they can sift it. That's all. They do not spy, hack, steal, or commit espionage activities. They only distribute information they receive, and nothing more.



let me ask you something....if a guy stole all your money, then ran to another guy and gave it to him, you would be ok with that second guy having your money, because he didn't actually steal it, he just received it...but, the first guy you would want arrested, the second guy, no problem....



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Never will I give up hope on people, like me and you, but let's be honest... Money is a motivator. Money talks.

I HOPE Assange's intentions are in the right place but I will remain on the fence until I know more and see evidence he isn't bought and paid for.

My hopes in revealing the truth whether be from Assange or groups like Anonymous is there but I remain skeptical with the motivation factor which lingers in my gut which I can't ignore.

Intent is everything. It reveals where the heart is. If his heart is in the right place.. great... if not he is just as guilty as Killary.




top topics



 
30
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join