Julian Assange Defense Fund frozen.

reply to post by undo

Fascism is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology

Source: wikipedia. google it yourself.

CALGARY—Calgary police are investigating the comments of a former adviser of Stephen Harper who suggested on television that the founder of WikiLeaks be assassinated.

Source: www.thestar.com...

If you're ignorant enough to not see the blatant fascism being executed against Assange, then you just go ahead and continue being a sheep.

reply to post by Revolution-2012


sorry, the sheep thing is getting old. i want sincere answers, not snide comments about the size of my intellect. in fact, i don't see the difference between socialism, fascism, and monarchies/patriarchies. it's the same thing, repackaged with a few word changes. the only thing that has changed, is who is in control of the money of the people and it's never the people themselves. if you have control of your own money, that's true capitalism.

reply to post by undo


I'm failing to see your point.

The actions currently being taken against Assange either are or are not fascist. Pick and choose.

Originally posted by Revolution-2012
reply to post by undo

 

I'm failing to see your point.

The actions currently being taken against Assange either are or are not fascist. Pick and choose.

well since i don't see that there's much of a difference, it's all of the above. the nations involved are not happy with mr. assange for some reason, and they represent various types of governments, all of which apparently share some disdain for him. for whatever reason. what do YOU think it is?

reply to post by undo


I believe he has a multitude of influential data, also some which should probably not be released unless heavily edited.

However, if he has anything that can show the complete corruption of the governments, world wide, it needs to be released.

okay, let's look at this logically:

1) is he threatening to release classified documents revealing the activities of governments other than western governments? no ? what.a.surprise!

2) why is that? is it because saudi arabia or iran or pakistan or india, are not religious countries? no ?

3) what are western countries trying to do? eradicate or ENCOURAGE, religion? if you say encourage, you need to turn on MTV, read OP-EDs in any western newspapers (other than glenn beck lol), and attend any public university! if that's encouragement, i'd like to read what you think discouragement is!

western countries are not fascist. mr. assange is ignoring the fascists. lol

i think what frustrates people like Revolution 2012 is that in america, you can be religious or non-religious. Religion is not encouraged but, it isn't outlawed either. . Because there are religious people in the usa, does not mean it's a fascist country. It's extremely secular. The laws on the books are extremely secular. The court system is extremely secular. Dunno how that can be construed as fascism, but i suppose there's somewhat of a comparison at the tippety top. Just not sure how much.

Originally posted by undo
i think what frustrates people like Revolution 2012 is that in america, you can be religious or non-religious. Religion is not encouraged but, it isn't outlawed either. .

This thread is about the fact that Assange's funds we're froze, not about religion.

Please try and stay on topic with the OP's thread.

reply to post by Revolution-2012


well isn't religion a hallmark of fascism? like, hitler started his little trek to infamy by first appealing to the christians and then to the pagans. his overall view was decidedly darwinist, with the whole ubermensch concept -- survival of the fittest theology, science above all else (for the same reason). he and stalin were buddies ya know. whoever heard of troops from a mountainous snowy country not being able to fight in snow! ( lose one point for the whole "we can't make it to moscow, it's too snowy!" spiel). after which stalin went on a "kill the jewish doctors/scientists" routine, himself. it's so obvious. i guess it's too obvious.

and here's the big question and another way in which this relates to the topic:

if as you say, he's attacking the fascist countries, why isn't he actually attacking fascist countries? lol instead he has a hard on for secular nations, who are leaning heavily toward socialism. things that make you go: hmmmmm.

Originally posted by matrixportal
reply to post by locster

 

"Wikileaks is basically a bunch of raw data and info. The problem with that, is it can be manipulated any which way-especially with the slow "leaking" of the documents. I don't know whose agenda it's serving or what purposes/motivations WL has. My bet is still on the whole psyops deal..."

This thread, your post and others, gives me pause. And a new viewpoint.
Here is why:
Since when do world gov's speak of 'embarrassment' and basically admit to so-called facts that paint them in a bad light? They make a living out of denying the obvious, changing the subject, answering a question without ever really answering it. So they're making a big ta-do about hunting down a whistle-blower who has some cables. I don't know about you, but the Gov I know and *cough* love would ordinarily just say the cables are fake. "He typed them. He made them up. They aren't real because 'we' would never say/do those things, hence he's a liar and a fake."

Really, isn't that their standard response to potential scandal? "It never happened."

So why aren't they saying these leaks are forgeries? Why, this time, do we not hear the denials we are so used to? It's almost as though they need us to believe this grandiose tragedy being played out on the world stage.

I've read the words from the released cables. They are typed words. Anybody could have typed those words. Where's the proof that they are indeed authentic? The only suggestion of any proof is the reaction of the government and the media. Their combined outrage. This is new, unless they're just beating the drum... in which case it's nothing new, and the whole thing's a scam.

Or... everything and everybody involved could be just as authentic as they seem. But really, when has THAT ever happened?!

reply to post by new_here


that's kinda what i was thinking, yep.
seems odd. the whole thing is weird.

I've read the words from the released cables. They are typed words. Anybody could have typed those words. Where's the proof that they are indeed authentic?

^THIS. it's another case of: it's too obvious.

reply to post by new_here


These are undeniable and can be authenticated, that's why they cant simply say "oh it's not real".

These could be taken into judicial courts and used against those who could be held accountable, especially in such events as war crimes.

Originally posted by Revolution-2012
reply to post by new_here

 

These are undeniable and can be authenticated, that's why they cant simply say "oh it's not real".

These could be taken into judicial courts and used against those who could be held accountable, especially in such events as war crimes.

really? can you prove it? not that i require proof for everything but this entire thing is so odd....

well if you want to know what a couple of american christians think of the entire thing, here's an interesting offering:
www.pidradio.com...

reply to post by undo


You can look at the released files. I think it's quite clear that certain individuals are asphyxiated by the cables, undeniably asphyxiated.

reply to post by Revolution-2012


i'm not asking if they are legit or not, i'm asking if it can be proven?
cause my experience has been that even with expert eye witness testimonies, congressional inquiries and the ilk, if the big dogs (whoever they may be) don't want the thing to have legs, it won't. and that's true, everywhere.

Originally posted by Revolution-2012
reply to post by new_here

 

These are undeniable and can be authenticated, that's why they cant simply say "oh it's not real".

These could be taken into judicial courts and used against those who could be held accountable, especially in such events as war crimes.

I see your point. I agree to some degree. But I also feel like levels of corexit in species in the gulf could have been used used against somebody in court, and the whole fiasco about 'bad intelligence' on WMD in Iraq could have held somebody's toes to the fire, but...

reply to post by new_here


starved terri schiavo to death on national television, like some macabre colliseum execution, even with several expert witnesses in her defense, doctors from the mayo clinic and so forth, all claiming that she could be further rehabilitated.

no, we had to witness that, so we would know beyond a doubt, that expert evidence doesn't mean squat if it's not part of the plan