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.

 

Assange: 'Will release poison pill of damaging secrets if killed or arrested"

page: 12
60
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by TedHodgson
 


He is a terrorist!!!!
No if ands or butt's about it.

He statement shows that...
If i got to jail i leak a doomsday file ect.ect...

Personally i think by his own actions and words as of late shows he isnt a good guy like he claim's.
rape charge's...threat's like this one to stay out of trouble.
Dumb sheep thinking he is a truth teller...
But if you think about it he is a flat criminal.

The last stuff he leaked included secret base's crucial to america's defense.
So it laymen term's...He just put me my family and my whole country at risk...For what reason?
To show he has alot of stolen documents to make our government go hmmm what else does he have. and not arrest him .

What this man is doing his cause is simple...
WW3 plain and simple.
Why else would he be doing it.
He want's the fall on western society to fail.

I personally hope they hang him from the highest tree for all to see.
307,006,550 is the number of people that live in the united state's.
that is 307,006,550 charges of wanton endangerment when he leaked our secret defense base's and interest's.

When he went to amazon.com and used there server for even 1 day..
to spread this bullshyt i added amazon.com to my block list for life.
cause they allowed him to share it for 1 day.
that's how badly i feel about this man and his AKA cause.




posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAmused
 


ah yeah hang him,

the world has a population of 7billion+ the american population is a drop in the ocean.
you think the rest of the world gives hoot?

its funny to see the dirty secrets fly not just from the US but other nations,

and its even more funny watching the reactions from people who dont like the secrets of their country
flowing, then again most its things to be very much ashamed of



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by infinite
 




Well, I stand by my remarks.


Illogical, but absolutely fine with me.



If I worked for the government, would I be on ATS?


One question...Just *how* naive are you?! Or more to the point, just *how* naive do you imagine I am?!

You seriously imagine, even after both the US and the UK government have *openly* stated that they view 'conspiracy websites' and members thereof with disdain and suspicion, and that they fully intend to infiltrate and target those websites to essentially divide opinion and confuse debate, using people employed by or contracted to a government or government body, equates to saying that a government employee would not visit ATS?

Again, with respect, i find your logic and argument baffling.



It was you who asked the silly questions, not me.


I asked no 'silly questions' at all. Simply because you say a question, which was based upon what you yourself wrote, is silly, it does not make it so. Frankly, you are being childish and more than a little obtuse yourself! If you don't want to debate, don't reply..simple.

To reiterate, this is what you yourself actually said:



The current administration in the United Kingdom has no interest in Assange being arrested and we've rejected a US request to extradite him (if we accept the Swedish arrest warrant. Which we haven't).


There is indication in your prose that you are a member of the government or a governmental body. It was a straightforward, reasonable and frankly innocent question i asked, based on your own words above. There was no insinuation from me that if you happened to be in government, that you personally have nefarious reasons for being a member of ATS, that was your own incorrect assumption.



It is too difficult to understand the would "we" does not equal to someone working to or with the government - ever heard "we" are we in this country? Last time I checked, we lived in a representative democracy - can I use the word "we" to describe us all or would you prefer me to define the concept of "we" each time?


No, it's not too difficult in the slightest. In fact, it is a very simple concept to grasp that 'we' can mean several different things - hence my question to clarify the situation in the first place!

Perhaps as a 'scholar' and 'writer', you should add 'reader' to your list of attributes, because you certainly seem to have missed what i wrote here; www.abovetopsecret.com...

To save you the trouble of further reading...here is what i wrote:



So..are you in the UK government or did you just mean 'we' as in the British 'we'?


So, your rather impatient and disrespectful point of 'we' being the 'collective we' was already asked by me on my original post to you.

Far from directing others to do their research, as you seem rather fond of doing, i suggest you could do well to read an entire post and pay proper attention to what it is you are replying to in future before getting short with members who ask reasonable questions regarding what you post.

And no, i do not expect you or anyone else for that matter to define or redefine the concept or context of 'we' each time it's used in a post..however *once* answered civilly would have been sufficient.

Just one question remains not directly and definitively answered by you. You see, you appear to be attempting to answer a direct question with questions of your own. And frankly, rhetorical questions do not amount to a definitive yes or no answer, regardless of how much emphasis on snide and snot is included in your reply.

Tell you what, seeing as you decline or are unable to give a straight answer and appear to be having a bad reading/communications day, i'll release you from the question, as i wouldn't wish to tax you unduly.

Anyone know how to claw back a star?



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:52 AM
link   
You are clearly right
Yet I missed it as has everyone else I have questioned.
Bizarre.
Perhaps I just happen to watch the wrong news at the wrong time and rely too much on google to give me a run down of the papers which frankly I refuse to buy..
I have genuinely not seen a thing, or heard a review, or seen a politician or other questioned or comments on what the papers say
So there you are the sky may be falling in but be on the right news channel at the right time to hear it.
.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by TedHodgson
 


I am sorry that you do not understant this in any way better, but Julian Assange's life is under constant threat. Imagine for a second releasing information that can damage foreign relations, and views on the political structure. I'm sorry but we don't live in a world that supports peace. And the only way this guy can actually stay alive is having dirt on those that would try to reach him. This is in fact his only leverage. Without this, his journey would have been cut off a long time ago. You need to understand that you are dealing with intelligence services. And they do not like the "leaks" of information to the public.

Now on the other hand if the governements get tired of him and are pressing harder, they will no doubt try and have him assasinated. This being no matter were he is im pretty sure that if they felt they could, they would try that approach. Now since they feel they can drop the ball and Assange most likelly has information that is dangerous to them, well they will not approach unless the oportunity arises. Thats how it works in politics, and thats how it works for him.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:09 AM
link   
This is really why Assange is being hounded.
www.msnbc.msn.com...
edit on 6-12-2010 by boomadatigger because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by KpxMarMoTT
 

On the contrary i understand very well, what you sir did was fail to understand the substance of my post like so many other poeple on this thread, clearly some poeple cant look through their own bitterness and see the fact that Julias Assange has threatend the american goverment with blackmail/extortion. therefore giving them reason to call him a terrorist, I AGREE that his actions were correct, I AGREE that he is not a terrorist and furthermore i hope he continues with wikileaks, however after threatening them with a release of top secrets if legal action should be taken against him he has thrown the ball into thier court and they can use that threat against him, If nobody agrees with the logical assumption i have made here, they clearly dont have the ability to see past the end of their own noses


edit on 6/12/10 by TedHodgson because: spelling



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:26 AM
link   
We on the ATS ,and other websites ,organisations we already know or read it 99% of leaks , but average Joe doesnt know that and that is the beauty of Wikileaks . They accelerate the awakening .Period.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Dr Cosma
 


The main agenda, at least in my view, is one similar to the (sadly, all but gone) great journalistic investigations of yesteryear from the likes of Woodward and Bernstein and the Washington Post, who broke the 'Watergate scandal' which highlighted corruption and criminal activity by the Nixon administration, which as we know (because of the leaking of the scandal) was about a burglary into the DPH, sponsored and arranged and subsequently covered up by Nixon and his cronies.

This was the first and last time a US president has resigned from office, and Nixon came perilously close to being placed in the slammer along with his cronies who became the fall guys for the crimes.

And this was simple burglary! What about burglary, spying and identity theft, targeting UN officials and the president of the UN's financial, credit and communications information? What charges will result from that i wonder...

I truly feel WL is simply trying to be a bastion of light and truth, in a similar vein as Woodward and Bernstein were in their day, in a sickening and deepening swell of darkness carried out in our names, and under our noses by those that pretend they are beyond reproach.

They are our window into the reality of what really has been going on, and i for one very loudly applaud them for their bravery and integrity.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by TedHodgson
 


There planing to completly destroy his life man! After all thy are not charging him with rape but an old obscure swetish law that makes having sex with out protection a crime.

This is being black balled at its finest so I say all power to wiki leaks! They are the only site to flap up the US gov and should bbe supported.

Without wikileaks the world would simply take there word that something requires to be classified and hidden but it turns out to be tons of petty name calling back stabing pre school shiz. They should have everything declassified except troop locations if current "meaning the troops are still there"



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by lifeform11

if the leaks really concerned our 'leaders' as much as it seems to do, then why the hell are they even reporting the leaks in the media and giving him a platform? all i have to do is look at how many other events and information that has been totally ignored by the media, then wonder why they are giving wikileaks air time.

we all know if the media ignore it then nobody will know, apart from those wacky conspiracy theorists on the web.


There's been an extremely dangerous hostage situation that's been ongoing since a couple weeks after the 9/11 Attacks, and it might just be that this is part of an effort to counter what's been an intractable - and steadily worsening - dilemma for the US government. We'll learn more within the next several months. I'd keep my eyes open and my powder dry for the moment. This is definitely not what it appears to be at first blush.
edit on 12/6/2010 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by boomadatigger
This is really why Assange is being hounded.
www.msnbc.msn.com...
edit on 6-12-2010 by boomadatigger because: (no reason given)


Ha! Now the MSM is trying to margonalize him by fitting him for a tinfoil hat. Priceless. There is intense corporate pressure to shut this guy's impact on the average person down completely. No one can shut him up, as has been proven, but as any real conspiracy buff knows, they only need to get the average person to mentally assign him to the folder that contains the David Icke's of the world, and it won't matter what kind of bombshell he releases.

This is why the leaks have been benign so far. To simply establish credibility. It's exremely difficult to cut through the media filter that global capitalism processes all information through. This Assange guy must be holding some serious cards for the national press to start being this bizarre with their reaction to him. I mean really, UFOs? In 35 pt headline font above his photo? That's 1950s style credibility assault stylings. Nothing subtle there at all.
edit on 12/6/2010 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok

What if we don't get to see it??
That would be a real shame..


If it endangers covert operatives, and/or impairs our ability to gather meaningful intelligence that would save lives, etc., then I hope I never get to see it.

Releasing embarrassing info is one thing, and if governments are skirting the rules, engaging in unseemly behavior (as they all do), etc., then sure, bring it to light...

But I cannot agree with, or condone behavior that would endanger lives, so I really hope THAT is not what is in his insurance file. Unfortunately, to be valuable enough, that's probably exactly what it is.

They are going after this guy more for what he COULD know and release, vs. what he actually HAS released, I'd wager.....and I can't say I wouldn't do the same in their shoes. That said though, I hope he is able to continue in releasing information that reveals what is going on, as long as it doesn't endanger lives.





edit on 6-12-2010 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)


This guy hit the nail on the perverbial head...

Wikileaks now cares about anyone elses safety that cannot be condoned.

If it takes Assange goingto jail or being assasinated then so be it..

If we really needed to see the insurance he would of released it.

He is being greedy with it and holding over everyones head..

I'm all for getting information out but when assange holds out on us makes me doubt him a WHOLE lot..

Seems like he is in it for himself...



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by infinite
 




If I worked for the government, would I be on ATS?


One question...Just *how* naive are you?! Or more to the point, just *how* naive do you imagine I am?!

You seriously imagine, even after both the US and the UK government have *openly* stated that they view 'conspiracy websites' and members thereof with disdain and suspicion, and that they fully intend to infiltrate and target those websites to essentially divide opinion and confuse debate, using people employed by or contracted to a government or government body, equates to saying that a government employee would not visit ATS?

Again, with respect, i find your logic and argument baffling.




The current administration in the United Kingdom has no interest in Assange being arrested and we've rejected a US request to extradite him (if we accept the Swedish arrest warrant. Which we haven't).


There is indication in your prose that you are a member of the government or a governmental body. It was a straightforward, reasonable and frankly innocent question i asked, based on your own words above. There was no insinuation from me that if you happened to be in government, that you personally have nefarious reasons for being a member of ATS, that was your own incorrect assumption.



It is too difficult to understand the would "we" does not equal to someone working to or with the government - ever heard "we" are we in this country? Last time I checked, we lived in a representative democracy - can I use the word "we" to describe us all or would you prefer me to define the concept of "we" each time?


No, it's not too difficult in the slightest. In fact, it is a very simple concept to grasp that 'we' can mean several different things - hence my question to clarify the situation in the first place!

Perhaps as a 'scholar' and 'writer', you should add 'reader' to your list of attributes, because you certainly seem to have missed what i wrote here; www.abovetopsecret.com...

To save you the trouble of further reading...here is what i wrote:



So..are you in the UK government or did you just mean 'we' as in the British 'we'?


So, your rather impatient and disrespectful point of 'we' being the 'collective we' was already asked by me on my original post to you.

Far from directing others to do their research, as you seem rather fond of doing, i suggest you could do well to read an entire post and pay proper attention to what it is you are replying to in future before getting short with members who ask reasonable questions regarding what you post.

And no, i do not expect you or anyone else for that matter to define or redefine the concept or context of 'we' each time it's used in a post..however *once* answered civilly would have been sufficient.

Just one question remains not directly and definitively answered by you. You see, you appear to be attempting to answer a direct question with questions of your own. And frankly, rhetorical questions do not amount to a definitive yes or no answer, regardless of how much emphasis on snide and snot is included in your reply.

Tell you what, seeing as you decline or are unable to give a straight answer and appear to be having a bad reading/communications day, i'll release you from the question, as i wouldn't wish to tax you unduly.

Anyone know how to claw back a star?



So, a poster doesn't have to be a government employee to "work on behalf of a government's interest" on a board like this. I was approached by a private sector marketing firm to see if I was interested in defending the Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory on boards that they would assign me. The pay would depend on the quality, consistency and realism of my work, with it beginning as a "per post" piece work type job. They found me (ironically) decimating the OCT on another international forum during the Bush/Kerry campaign of 2004, and I guess tey figured I was getting paid by the other team in the debate. I didn't take the gig, and mainly because there's noting to work with for argument on that side. I see it happening here too. Poor b*stards. How the hell can you come up with anything new or breakthrough when the premise is so threadbare at this point?

The corporations get all the contracts for stuff like this, so when they say they're not working for any government, they're being honest. They're subcontracting for marketing firms who have contracts to provide pay per post (usually paypal) thread traffic that is designed to make the average person to become bored and/or turned off by the ugliness of the debate. Whatever it takes to cause the readers to choose other threads. This is why the OCT thread posts are so mechanical and predictable. They're getting paid to turn the debate into a one sided waste of time for the average person who's already spent time on the level of argument that's being carefully constructed by the seemingly clueless OCT poster. Same old, same old, (WTC thermate, WTC7 freefall, size needed for a full government conspiracy, and so on) rehashed over and over with nothing new brought into the debate translates into boring reading, and on to the next fascinating controversy for most folks.

This WikiLeaks issue is bringing out the professional posters and lots of media weirdness. That makes me curious as to why. Especially since nothing's actually been revealed by WikiLeaks yet. At least, nothing thats been of any consequence.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Mask
So...for us to get the real leaks...he needs to die or be arrested?

Funny...I thought Wikileaks was supposed to be leaking these docs anyways.

MM


Obviously he's not stupid. He's got an ace in the hole. This guy really needs to be commended by the common person. He's brought TPTB to their knees.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by TedHodgson
 


Wow... worst statement he ever could have made.

I mean, isn't Wikileaks supposed to be an organization that gets whistleblower information out to the public? By uttering that 'threat', he's essentially turning his declared mission into a mere blackmail. I thought he was going to be releasing this information regardless of what happens to him or his organization.

Does this mean if they leave him alone, he's not going to release anything?

Mr. Assange, your credibility is plummeting.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   
I didnt read all the responses on here, so forgive me if I skip yours.

To the person who said Im scared... What am I scared of? Im not "tptb" I have no vested interest in WL or what they release. That being said, all he is doing is creating diplomatic rifts, hence, ID KILL HIM. Sure, they shouldnt have said it if they didnt want it out, but is it necessary or relevant to release personal opinions? Nah.

There was one more response to me I saw, but I forgot it, sorry.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   
his bank accounts have just been blocked too..



www.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by TedHodgson
 

While watching a "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" episode, I was impressed with how the writers dealt with this type of scenario...

If the villain (The Terrorist Assange) is always one step ahead of the hero (The United States & UK), the best way to defeat the villain is to press the button before he does. Once you take away the villain's instrument of destruction, you strip away every ounce of his power. As the dust settles and clears, you take serious steps to destroy the man himself. Assassination, prison, etc.. After this whole mess is over, you pick yourself off the floor, tighten classified documents, tighten security at all government and military facilities, and then rebuild your trust with the citizens.

It is that simple.

edit on 6-12-2010 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jobeycool

This Wikileaks guy is down right dumb and crazy.



That's some really deep thinking and in-depth analysis my friend!


What type of theoretical analysis and philosophical methodology did you use to come to that conclusion?

The emotional approach?


J/K

Peace!




top topics



 
60
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join