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.

 

Wikileaks' Assange: 2,000 Sites Now Have All Documents!

page: 4
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by xavi1000
 


Was going to star this until I saw the last line.

Way to destroy your own cred.




posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by lnr42
 


THAT is the real question, isn't it?

I can honestly say, yes I would hand it over. (Again, assuming it has "critical information")

If it is/was a bluff, then no I would not hand it over (Obviously, then it becomes a lose)

Does it make him a "bad person" for not wanting to die, no. But it does make him the same as those that first made the secrets, because he is enabling the secrets to continue. And for the same reasons that they (the secrets) were created, self protection.

I am saying, that he is the pot calling the kettle black at this point. And I am ultra tired of hearing about his BM, he needs to crap or get off the stool.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by lnr42
 


Thank you


All I want is the insurance password, or some peace and quiet.

I don't expect either, but I like to type out my position too!

(Thank you for the intelligent discussion! Even if we disagree
)

PS I don't think Assange is a bad guy, I just think he likes to talk alot.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:30 AM
link   
reply to post by adigregorio
 


Your argument is flawed.

He is slowly releasing information so that he may redact any parts of it that may put someone's life in harm if it is released.

He is not "holding on to information" and "playing with our lives".

He has released all cables, encrypted, to several websites so that in case he is KILLED or JAILED, the information he has can still be released - only without the redactions, causing whoever KILLED or JAILED him to be responsible for whoever's life may be harmed.

If he did not release all the cables, or the insurance file, he could be killed and the information would be killed with him.

If he released all the information he has without checking it first and redacting it, he would have blood on his hands for releasing names of secret operatives.

He is doing this the right way. It's good to criticize, but your argument does not hold up.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by MidnightTide
 


Together we stand divided we fall. And we're losing. On a realistic scale we are all in the same boat, we are all here on one planet.
Dividing the planet by creating boundaries and naming those areas called countries, United kingom, U.S, France, Spain are all divisions caused by man. Who said that there should be individual countries anyway?
Go onto google earth, beautiful planet, zoom in you'll see countries, zoom into a country you'll see further divisions. Villages-Towns-Cities-Countries-Continents-Earth. The point im making is that we are all on the same planet, a planet which apparently sits in a galaxy that would be represented by a pin prick on an A4 piece of paper.
Languages,
all divisions caused by man using language barrier
Currency
A means of manipulating and controlling the masses
Fuel
Electricity, gas and oil, ran by you know who doing more of the same

We are all on one planet yet we have all lost touch of who we are, segregated and seperated. Yeah who gives a # what happens on the other side of the planet to him or her im ok i dont know them? Thats the way things have gone. No one is arsed? Why? Whats happened? Is this what its supposed to be like? somehow i dont think so not deep down anyway. I think someone somewhere down the line has (without sounding crazy) has used or done something to his/her advantage. Yeah sounds stupid, but somethings not right.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by lnr42
 


My credibility ? This is not about this ,this is about REAL human lifes.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by againuntodust
 


We have already established that I am referencing the "Insurance File"

Which, unless you have the password (Or a source that says the file is no longer relevant) makes my argument valid.

I am open to being wrong, I just need some evidence. I have a file that needs a password to open, and I am told I don't get the password because the file is insurance. (Which is a gambling term, and gambling is a game.)

Which brings us back to Assange playing a game with our lives (assuming the insurance file has any clout)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by adigregorio

Originally posted by wcitizen
Yes, I've heard of the insurance file.

Ah, then you agree!



Nope, what I said was I am aware of the insurance file....how on earth does that mean I agree with you - except in the realm of personal bias and imaginings?







Ooo! Are we going to play the "technical game"? Can I be the racecar? (Oh wait, that is Monopoly.)



Nope, not a game, it's called separating fiction from truth.




More people have agreed with me in this thread, than have agreed with you. How is that?


More accurate - but not entirely so.




I can link the specific posts if you would like?



Not necessary.


Of course I ask that you do the same, if you require it of me.


Not necessary, I can read.



Are we done yet?


Oh yes!
edit on 2-1-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


Well, I don't do well responding to a bunch of one-liners.

Thank you for the conversation, and since "we are done" I will not be responding to you any further.

And all I have wanted is the insurance password...seriously...

I even said I don't think he is a bad guy, just a talker. I'm a talker! Ug.

Anyway, I stick to my original stance, he needs to either put up or be quiet. I mean, a boy can only cry wolf so many times. (Though it is looking like he can cry more than I would have thought.)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 



Again, thank you DD.


I am SO glad to know this. And kudos to Wikileaks for being responsible and holding back, even in the face of persecution.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:56 AM
link   
First you say:

Originally posted by againuntodust
He is not "holding on to information" and "playing with our lives".



Originally posted by againuntodust
He has released all cables, encrypted, to several websites so that in case he is KILLED or JAILED

Point out how this is not using the information for his own benifit?

Then you can tell me how flawed my argument is.

He is holding this information so that he will be protected.

This information was secret so that others would be protected.

He is the same as the others, because he is using the information in the SAME WAY.

Of course methinks you know this.

I wish I didn't have a cold, and had some sleep. I would be able to handle this a bit better (Hence why two responses to one post.)

Anyway, I need some coffee!



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by adigregorio
 



Thank you also. Although we see this differently, we are on the same side.
Peace.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by adigregorio
 



Originally posted by adigregorio


Then you can tell me how flawed my argument is.

He is holding this information so that he will be protected.

This information was secret so that others would be protected.

He is the same as the others, because he is using the information in the SAME WAY.



Your argument is flawed due to the fact that wikileaks does plan on releasing all the information eventually and is taking the steps outlined in the OP to ensure that it can.

That is a whole different kettle of fish to the US Govs agenda of secrecy and lies
edit on 2-1-2011 by lnr42 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-1-2011 by lnr42 because: pointless shouty caps



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   
There are only really 3 alternatives here - (1) He is a Government schill (and when I say Government, I mean some group or collection of groups that have some sort of Government backing), putting out information that suits their purpose as well as possibly serving to help expose whistleblowers that send him info (gathering intel on people willing to be whisteblowers) - (2) He is an unwitting pawn of certain powers that wish to release information for their own purposes (these powers might well include large corporate interests or the Government itself) to manipulate certain negotiations - or (3) He has truly amassed a large amount of embarrassing data, which he has managed to distribute in such a way to allow him to continue breathing for the immediate future. Your guess is as good as anyone else's as to what the real truth is - when playing with the Government, you never REALLY know....the trumped up "sexual misconduct" charges are an interesting twist, either made to look like Government interference as a distraction or cover or a reaaaaly poor attempt to discredit the man (usually when the Government wants to trash someone, it takes the form of inappropriate conduct with a minor or underage porn on their computers, etc.), or the hooker at the center of the charges just wanted to take advantage of the publicity he was getting to roll the dice for the possibility of getting a big payday - with Governments around the world jumping on board and using this pressure him. Fun and Games....



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   
There are only really 3 alternatives here - (1) He is a Government schill (and when I say Government, I mean some group or collection of groups that have some sort of Government backing), putting out information that suits their purpose as well as possibly serving to help expose whistleblowers that send him info (gathering intel on people willing to be whisteblowers) - (2) He is an unwitting pawn of certain powers that wish to release information for their own purposes (these powers might well include large corporate interests or the Government itself) to manipulate certain negotiations - or (3) He has truly amassed a large amount of embarrassing data, which he has managed to distribute in such a way to allow him to continue breathing for the immediate future. Your guess is as good as anyone else's as to what the real truth is - when playing with the Government, you never REALLY know....the trumped up "sexual misconduct" charges are an interesting twist, either made to look like Government interference as a distraction or cover or a reaaaaly poor attempt to discredit the man (usually when the Government wants to trash someone, it takes the form of inappropriate conduct with a minor or underage porn on their computers, etc.), or the hooker at the center of the charges just wanted to take advantage of the publicity he was getting to roll the dice for the possibility of getting a big payday - with Governments around the world jumping on board and using this pressure him. Fun and Games....



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by againuntodust
He has released all cables, encrypted, to several websites so that in case he is KILLED or JAILED



Point out how this is not using the information for his own benifit?


If he dies or is jailed without releasing all cables, then the information is forever lost. He is protecting himself to protect his ability to release the information in a responsible manner (ie, redacting names and things that may harm others).


Then you can tell me how flawed my argument is.

He is holding this information so that he will be protected.

This information was secret so that others would be protected.


That is an assumption. The information was not secret so that others would be protected, it is secret for reasons we only find out after it is released. For instance, how is keeping secret diplomatic cables about forcing Europe to hike food prices to institute GMO foods protecting someone? Rhetorical question. But it points to the invalidity of the assumption that the information is secret to protect others.


He is the same as the others, because he is using the information in the SAME WAY.


How is this the same. Government is group A, Assange is group B.

Group A:
Creates the information by taking actions.
Keeps the information secret.
Has no plans to ever release the information.

Group B:
Is given the information Group A created.
Redacts and releases the information to the public in a responsible manner.
Plans to release all of the information responsibly, but if harmed or imprisoned, will unload the entirety of the documents to the public without redaction.


edit on 2-1-2011 by againuntodust because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Since you mentioned assumtions:


Originally posted by againuntodust
If he dies or is jailed without releasing all cables, then the information is forever lost. He is protecting himself to protect his ability to release the information in a responsible manner (ie, redacting names and things that may harm others).


May I have a source for this? A source that states this is the specific reason for the password protected file.

Or is this your assumption?



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


As much as I'm a big supporter of Julian Assange, I am getting rather bored with no big eye opener coming out. Wish he'd release something good soon before we all fall asleep again.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by adigregorio
 



One of the files identified this weekend by The Sunday Times — called the “insurance” file — has been downloaded from the WikiLeaks website by tens of thousands of supporters, from America to Australia.

Assange warns that any government that tries to curtail his activities risks triggering a new deluge of state and commercial secrets.

Link


An encrypted cache of uncensored documents that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has circulated across the Internet may ensure that a huge array of secrets will be revealed even if the website is shut down or Assange is arrested.

Link



edit on 2-1-2011 by againuntodust because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by againuntodust
 


BOTH of those sources say that Assange is saving the file for PERSONAL BENIFIT

PLEASE show where it is NOT that way.

Until then my argument is valid, because THAT is my argument!

My argument:

Assange is using the information for personal benifit.

BOTH sources the poster I am responding to quoted, CONFIRM this.

EDIT--Clarification

Assange warns that any government that tries to curtail his activities risks triggering a new deluge of state and commercial secrets.

Link


...may ensure that a huge array of secrets will be revealed even if the website is shut down or Assange is arrested.

Link
(IE Has not been released yet)

Please, show me where this is not for personal benifit?

Then you can call my argument invalid.
edit on 1/2/2011 by adigregorio because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join