Repubblica claims Interview with Assange, Says internet is restore

Repubblica Interview

So you score an interview with one of the most wanted (and allegedly missing) men on Earth....what do you talk about? Current events? check.... Okay, what about a verifiably CURRENT photo? Oops, missed that one...

Repubblica's interview claims Assange's internet "has been restored..." So where is Julian? When was it restored? Why hasn't he done a live stream to show everyone he is not compromised?

What about all the outstanding questions that lead to further conspiracy theories that he's been compromised? Why not address those things? Why is he not Tweeting? Why not release the files he indicated were coming?

yes, many many outstanding questions.... Until Assange shows his face in a verifiable fashion, people will continue to believe that he is compromised and the nefarious parties are partying around the honeypot.

Best person to ask is Hilary Clinton

She knows where he is....

a reply to: CIAGypsy

Hello old friend

If he is alive he KNOWS these questions are being asked. I keep running through my head the reasons he would not confirm.

a reply to: Advantage

There are many things about this situation that have me very concerned. First and foremost because the entire situation doesn't pass the smell test. I've posted various things in regards to that...and there are numerous sites that document the questions.

But I also have personal reasons that may or may not be tied into this poker game. Could be coincidence, but it's awfully unlucky coincidence if that's the case. My gut instinct has kept me safe for nearly 2 decades. I never doubt it...and it's blaring like a screaming demon which doesn't help my sense of dread.

a reply to: CIAGypsy

I have been reading posts in 'endchan' (not one i was familiar with before) and there is a non stop effort to decoded the insurance key.

Agree, there is no real evidence that says he is alive...thus the effort being made.

Wish them luck...better yet thoughts and prayers.

a reply to: CIAGypsy


dup

Just wanted to add that the photo in the Repubblica interview is old (for those people who don't realize that...). Again, you have an interview with someone who is thought to be dead or missing. Why use an old photo if you are allegedly interviewing him LIVE in the Embassy????

a reply to: CIAGypsy

My gut instinct tells me he is compromised. No one can say for sure at this point, but id have to be convinced that he wasnt before I think different. My thoughts are with him. Hes been incredibly courageous in exposing corruption.

It looks like Assange likes to play the game. As long as people keep talking about him he stays relevant. There really isn't much for him to leak right now with Trump and Putin being best buds. So he's gotta get attention somehow.

Assange is kinda like those doughnuts... they have a number and a cold cell waiting for them.

a reply to: CIAGypsy

Apparently, word is the deadman's switch(s) has gone off. The insurance files are out there already, but the key isn't. Not exactly Sometimes hiding something in plain sight is the best strategy.

Wikieaks has been compromised sometime around Oct. 22nd. At that time there were massive DDOS attacks on 4Chan and Reddit. Right around the time the deadman's switch(s) was supposedly flipped, all of them.

People are looking. Lots of numbers being crunched But, you probably already know about that!

That said, I would be very wary of anything "official" from Wikileaks.

He used to appear at the window at the Embassy. The fact he doesn't seem to have done that at all since this chain of events started is itself telling (I haven't seen any reports to the contrary).

I'm of the opinion he is no longer there.

Is it a double-bluff, and they found a way to get him out?

There was a report that British authorities stormed the building, but I think that was debunked.

a reply to: mirageofdeceit

Yep, the whole flag thing and whatnot...

Personally, I don't think he's dead -- but I also don't think he's in any position to be doing interviews right now.

Ah, well look at that...a nifty little sideshow distraction, right on cue. What is it that they don't want us paying attention to on today's menu? Why keep trying to feed us the same old stale sh!t sammich? And for the love of all that is holy, why do people keep on swallowing it?

I am going to be seriously pissed if some cataclysmic event wipes out the human race before I get the answers to those questions. I will haunt everyone. Everywhere. For eternity.

a reply to: tigertatzen

Why keep trying to feed us the same old stale sh!t sammich?

Because they are a one trick pony and they don't really care much about other peoples lives.

Maybe Assange hopped on a last minute flight. I doubt very many people would care if he got jumped after this fight he picked.


ETA:

I guess he barked up the wrong flagpole.

a reply to: tigertatzen

"They" (and I don't even really know who "they" are, as "they" are not the alphabets..well, not all of them at least) don't want people to find the encryption keys for the insurance files. That's my best guess based on what I've heard.

a reply to: CIAGypsy

I found a gem in the article in your OP.

This was the question asked to Assange:

In a famous interview, you declared that at the beginning you thought that your biggest role would be in China and in some of the former Soviet states and North Africa. Quite the opposite, most of WikiLeaks' biggest revelations concern the US military-industrial complex, its wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq and its serious human rights violations in the war on terror. These abuses have had a heavy impact in an open and democratic society like the United States and produced 'dissidents' like Chelsea Manning willing to expose them. Why aren't human rights abuses producing the same effects in regimes like China or Russia, and what can be done to democratise information in those countries?

This was his response, gem in bolds:

"In Russia, there are many vibrant publications, online blogs, and Kremlin critics such as [Alexey] Navalny are part of that spectrum. There are also newspapers like "Novaya Gazeta", in which different parts of society in Moscow are permitted to critique each other and it is tolerated, generally, because it isn't a big TV channel that might have a mass popular effect, its audience is educated people in Moscow. So my interpretation is that in Russia there are competitors to WikiLeaks, and no WikiLeaks staff speak Russian, so for a strong culture which has its own language, you have to be seen as a local player. WikiLeaks is a predominantly English-speaking organisation with a website predominantly in English. We have published more than 800,000 documents about or referencing Russia and president Putin, so we do have quite a bit of coverage, but the majority of our publications come from Western sources, though not always. For example, we have published more than 2 million documents from Syria, including Bashar al-Assad personally. Sometimes we make a publication about a country and they will see WikiLeaks as a player within that country, like with Timor East and Kenya. The real determinant is how distant that culture is from English. Chinese culture is quite far away".

Seems to me that this particular website is just trying to get some clicks.

originally posted by: CIAGypsy
Just wanted to add that the photo in the Repubblica interview is old (for those people who don't realize that...). Again, you have an interview with someone who is thought to be dead or missing. Why use an old photo if you are allegedly interviewing him LIVE in the Embassy????

because obviously this website is trolling.

I thought Republica was a pop group from the 90's.



You know....

The interview looks legit in terms for the context quoted allegedly by Assange.

The real twist here (in my analysis) is that he was compromised years ago and that this "what happened to him" device is all a gimmick to further his 'character' along the script and add character development. This will help him in future parts of the plot.

Basic government corruption and intrigue isn't exactly a huge deal (it's very normal), and revealing that corruption is actually what basic journalism is suppose to be about.

The big secrets are still in the shadows and we are left speculating.

Everything is far too convenient here...
I am suspicious.