It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Check out the Wikileaks James Bond Office Bunker! (or, how to be mislead by the media)

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 06:51 PM
I was amazed to hear that Julian Assange has a sexy, James Bond / Bat-Cave style "secret" nuke-proof bunker/office in Stockholm, Sweden, buried deep in a granite mountain. This is a where the Wikileaks servers are held, complete with a glass platform to the main conference room floating above the workers below. Here are just some of the unbelievable, but absolutely true facts about this office:

* There is only one entry/exit through a 1.5 foot steel door.
* Two generators from German U-boat submarines for backup power with warning system sound horns.
* Glass walkway to floating circular conference room with designer furniture with lunar floors hovers above work area.
* Fish tank, plants, and fountains throughout to add ambiance to otherwise stark landscape.

Somehow, someone was given access and they were able to get photos. Check it out!:

Here are some quotes about Assange and this fascinating place:

With his eccentric personal life and air of mystery, the flamboyant WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange seems to be doing his best to impersonate a James Bond villain. How appropriate, then, that he has chosen what looks like an 007 film set as the back-up store for the thousands of confidential emails and documents that have shaken the world. Read more:

If I had angered over half the world’s leaders and the Internet, I’d be hiding in a cave too.

A talk radio station I listen to asked "Who funds this?".

The general picture being are painted is that he is trying to be bigger than life, to be something that he is not. Something just seemed fishy to me with this. Why would he allow people access to take pictures? Why would he spend the money and time to do all this when it is largely for show? The pictures looks like they are for marketing purposes. Other pictures on the internet even show low lying fog, lighting, models and special photography techniques to up the visual impact. Why would Wikileaks do this?

Well a little searching and I got the answer.

This place is not a Wikileaks office at all. It is actually the office of a company called Bahnhof, an ISP that hosts secure data storage. That's it. It's not even secret. In one of the videos, the CEO says it is one of the most well known offices in the world. It is actually famous for it's glamor.

Your thoughts?
edit on 12-12-2010 by TattarrattaT because: Add more photos

posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 07:07 PM

Originally posted by TattarrattaT
Here are just some of the unbelievable, but absolutely true facts about this office:

Your thoughts? asked for's mine.

I dunno how factual those details are right now, due to immediately getting the idea that these are photoshopped pics. I can't prove it (yet), but that's what it looks like instantly, and most shoppers would probably agree after seeing this for any length of time.

This could be my mistake, due to unusual lighting.

It may also say in the article that these are only artistic "interpretations", so forgive me if it does. I have not read the piece yet.

I'm off to figure this out for myself...if I return to learn these are fake...then that will lead me to say-

1) Fake pics do not instantly make the claims on his bunker "absolutely true".

2) If they are fake...why? Couldn't Assange (if real) provide real pics of his real lair?

If they are real...I'll ask myself this-

1) If they are real...ARE YOU SERIOUS? Is THIS how a hacker lives/works? Really? Some punk ex-hacker really achieved Batman status? Really? I see...

2) If real...wonder how you get all that fancy stuff...wonder who gives it to you...wonder who funds it...wonder who runs it...wonder, wonder, wonder...wonder land.

We are not through the looking glass yet, Alice.


edit on 12-12-2010 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 07:11 PM
its looks photoshopped to me,

why fisheye lens?

what is the source of these pictures?

posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 07:15 PM
It's not 'wikileaks' own personal 'hosting bunker', it's merely a server/hosting company who have setup shop in an old hardened/cold war bunker.

Bahnhof was founded in 1994 and is Sweden's oldest and one of the largest independent national Internet providers. We combine personalized service and local commitment with solid technical experience and knowledge.

The whole 'James Bond-like Bunker' dealio is merely a headline-grabbing 'creation' put forth by the MSM .... apparently to further mystify and incite a reaction from the 6o'clock SnewZe 'crowd'.

posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 07:25 PM
I am finding no "right off the bat mistakes" far...if photoshopped, pretty damn good.

These may perhaps be legit... far.

Its the engine room thats not selling me...its odd and a few things don't add up to me. Shadows not behaving how I would expect, textures being "too vibrant" , but enhancing is standard practice and not "fakery".

Fish eye could be used to simply show more. Same reason it was used on the moon (ykno, if you think we went there). far.

edit on 12-12-2010 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 08:01 PM
Here's some more pictures of the place, sans fisheye..,

posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 08:12 PM
Perhaps Assange is Disinfo after all........

posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 08:19 PM
reply to post by NotTooHappy

From that link:

Thanks to the New York Post article we noticed that this project Pionen White Mountain, which we featured November 24, 2008, is indeed the WikiLeaks Headquarters. Pionen – White Mountain designed by Albert France-Lanord Architects is housed in a former 1,200 sqm Cold War bunker (originally built as a World War II bunker); an amazing location 30 meters down under the granite rocks of the Vita Berg Park in Stockholm.

Wow, just wow. Unbelievable. Who will hold these people accountable? Does anybody even care? Or do we actually like the sensationalism?
edit on 12-12-2010 by TattarrattaT because: spelling

posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 08:54 PM
This seems oddly common in the hacking world. Below is a lint to an article about The Pirate Bay moving into a nuclear bunker:

posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 08:57 PM
The first picture at least DOES look completely CGI but I am willing to be told I'm wrong, it does have a certain sheen of sparkling shininess that real life rarely has

Edit to add
According to the EXIF the images are copyrighted by Jann Lipka whose website is here

The site says she is

editorial and commercial photography , digital imaging digital compositing and retouching

I wonder if I should email and ask if they are photographs or not

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

posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 10:21 AM
Well here's an update on this

I did actually email the woman who holds the copyright on these images and asked her if they were photographs or graphics and she did reply to me (I wasn't expecting her to) So this is straight from the horses mouth

This was what she said

Images are 100% real photographs .
The place is 100 m from my work
( But with limited access for general public )
BBC made a short film I think recent Thursday from the place .

I don't know what the short film is but I will have a look around for it

posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 08:58 PM
I'm really sorry my OP must not have been clear enough. (This is my first thread ever on ATS.)

Thanks Dave for the diligence in finding the author and calling her! That is some good research. I have enjoyed your other posts and contributions as well.

But sometimes, the answers are much simpler. I think this thread is a good example of how we sometimes look for the more complex answers for things when the simple answer is staring us in the face. Literally. My OP tells you right there what this place is with links and everything. Right after where I say: "Well a little searching and I got the answer. "

There is no question if the pictures are real or if the place is real.

This thread was about why the media continues to claim that the Wikileaks headquarters are in this bunker when it is clear from a Google search that it is the office of an ISP. Anybody can be a client of this ISP. That does not make this place your personal headquarters! They are sensationalizing.

It always amazes me how our brains cause things to jump out at us that support our world views and assumptions while actually blocking out the things that do not. This is the very reason why so many people can believe so many things that we would consider crazy while they are still fully rational, discerning individuals. I think we should all be careful how we perceive things as it is easy to fall into this trap.

"When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail."

posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 09:03 PM
reply to post by TattarrattaT

Your absolutely right about the sensationalism and as you said it isn't wikileaks own "personal bunker"
I don't know how you would get a paper like the Daily Mail to stop reporting stuff in that way though.

The article in the Telegraph is a bit more realistic

edit on 13-12-2010 by davespanners because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-12-2010 by davespanners because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:37 PM
This just makes wikileaks look even worse than they already do in my opinion. Its just really silly and immature.

Wikileaks - A sponsored disinformation project with immature pictures of its lair.

new topics

top topics


log in