Julian Assange: A vote for Hillary Clinton is a "vote for endless stupid war"

I GUESS iM A HYPOCRITE, I USUALLY DONT LIKE FOREIGNERS VERBALLY INFLUENCING OUR POLITICS BUT THIS ONE ILL GIVE A PASS. CLINTON IS HORRIBLE AND SO ARE HER BRIDGECLUB LADIES SHE SURROUNDS HERSELF WITH, PLACE SMELLS LIKE TUPPERWARE, AVON AND A PYRAMID SCHEME.

originally posted by: Medicator
I GUESS iM A HYPOCRITE, I USUALLY DONT LIKE FOREIGNERS VERBALLY INFLUENCING OUR POLITICS BUT THIS ONE ILL GIVE A PASS. CLINTON IS HORRIBLE AND SO ARE HER BRIDGECLUB LADIES SHE SURROUNDS HERSELF WITH, PLACE SMELLS LIKE TUPPERWARE, AVON AND A PYRAMID SCHEME.

Yes, then you are a hypocrite and so you are free to pick another war monger that suits your particular tastes.

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: ExNihiloRed

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: ExNihiloRed
a reply to: InMyShell

The irony of a man who made his career leaking classified information complaining about a woman alleged to have leaked classified information.

Please remind me again why any of us should care what Julian Assange has to say? I chalk this up to a sad attempt to make himself relevant again.

He's a hero. What he does is distribute documents and information to the masses that should never have been classified or hidden from us in the first place. He' forces governments to be more transparent. Why would you not want that?

I was reading about all of this and uncovered something truly ironic that I am sure many people here would love to see.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton decried immediately the illegal publication of classified documents from government computers, and defended the need for “confidential space” for diplomatic conversations. In addition, she noted that people’s lives could be endangered by confidential data disclosures.

Source

And that should show you that Hillary Clinton is a corrupt war monger. She is part of the problem.

So were most of your other Presidents, so why is Assange focussing on Hillary (a woman with power) when other male candidates, who claim they can also be effective Chiefs of war, and who spew out more war mongering rhetoric? He is transparent in this instance.

He focuses on a lot of people, but probably in this instance it was her position as Secretary of State. She's not just a random target.

a reply to: InMyShell

Julian Assange is actually a double agent "i believe". I have a book on information security principles where his name is in it "before the whole wikileaks thing" I think he is actually working for the us gov.

Here's why i think hes a double not like Snowden he fled to countries that would of handed him to us on a silver platter! where are Snowden fled to China and Russia! His revaluations lead directly to the person who supplied the information and he was captured and imprisoned! I think he is a plant who was made to let people think they can rely on him while he hoards the information and releases it slowing after the information has already been revealed elsewhere.

originally posted by: jobless1
a reply to: InMyShell

Julian Assange is actually a double agent "i believe". I have a book on information security principles where his name is in it "before the whole wikileaks thing" I think he is actually working for the us gov.

Can you please name the book in question?

Julian Assange was involved in the information and computer fields for at least 15 years prior to WikiLeaks. He was convicted on charges relating to hacking in Australia during those years, and he later provided advice to the Victorian Police and aided in prosecutions. He had further experience in addition to the aforementioned. As a result, it stands to reason that he would have some knowledge of information security principles before founding WikiLeaks in 2006.

That said, if Assange was working for anyone, it would be an Australian agency. Simply due to his above involvement in supporting Australian agencies in his earlier years.

Here's why i think hes a double not like Snowden he fled to countries that would of handed him to us on a silver platter! where are Snowden fled to China and Russia! His revaluations lead directly to the person who supplied the information and he was captured and imprisoned! I think he is a plant who was made to let people think they can rely on him while he hoards the information and releases it slowing after the information has already been revealed elsewhere.

If i recall correctly, the Swedish case against Assange opened in 2010 and was subsequently closed, allowing him to travel within the confines of Europe while the Swedes were working the case out. They reopened it and requested a warrant to extradite Assange. By that time, he was in Britain and couldn't leave, so he fought the request and lost. It's at that moment he fled to the Ecuadorian Embassy.

Regarding Snowden, Assange and WikiLeaks were supporting his travels out of Hong Kong. He was traveling to South America via Russia, but his passport was cancelled en route, trapping him in Moscow's airport.

Regarding Bradley Manning, he was discovered as the leaker and arrested because he told others of what he had done. His arrest wasn't WikiLeaks' doing, it was his own.

originally posted by: ExNihiloRed
a reply to: InMyShell

The irony of a man who made his career leaking classified information complaining about a woman alleged to have leaked classified information.

Please remind me again why any of us should care what Julian Assange has to say? I chalk this up to a sad attempt to make himself relevant again.

Leaking information is beside the point.

Assange is criticising a woman who, due to her poor decisions, should not be President of the United States.

Julian Assange may not be plastered all over the news as he was in 2010, but it doesn't make him any less relevant. He assisted in Snowden's escape from Hong Kong and he continues to leak pertinent information through WikiLeaks as well.

Don't let the media fool you.

originally posted by: schuyler
Whether or not you agree that what Assange has done is proper, I doubt seriously that he has "read thousands" of communiques written by Hillary, or that he is somehow uniquely qualified to speak about her character. He has an opinion, a foreign one at that, and what he says is predictable. Having said that

I still agree with him.

To be fair, we don't know what he has access to, and it's possible he has read a lot of Hillary's cables from his own leaks and others exposed through FOIAs.

I don't see what a foreign opinion has to do with anything either. Being a foreigner doesn't lessen his opinions.

That said, i concur in agreeing that Assange is correct in what he says.

I agree with him and no matter how much you hate him, at least he actually did something with his life.

originally posted by: jobless1
a reply to: InMyShell

Julian Assange is actually a double agent "i believe". I have a book on information security principles where his name is in it "before the whole wikileaks thing" I think he is actually working for the us gov.

Here's why i think hes a double not like Snowden he fled to countries that would of handed him to us on a silver platter! where are Snowden fled to China and Russia! His revaluations lead directly to the person who supplied the information and he was captured and imprisoned! I think he is a plant who was made to let people think they can rely on him while he hoards the information and releases it slowing after the information has already been revealed elsewhere.

Well, Assange didn't put anyone in gaol, and his 'revaluations' whatever they are, also had nothing to do with it.

The said person gave him/herself away to someone else who snitched on him..her.
You sure do talk funny, what's funny too, is that for something so recent and so well known, is that the story has changed already. It just shows that Henry Ford was right, 'History is bunk' .....and yes, he did say that, twice in fact, just slightly different wording.

a reply to: InMyShell

He is right really considering she acts like a puppet half the time. Shes easily bought and she is easily sent in with the dirty laundry often, she does not fight for any view of her own only the view of those who pay her.

While I agree with the majority of the general thrust of his analysis of her decisions while in office to date (even if I wouldn't personally use his particular choice of words,) and this doesn't necessarily lessen the validity of said analysis or the premise thereof or the likelihood that he has been privy - to some extent - to information we are not supporting that premise ...

... imo neither Assange nor Russia (nor RT) are the knights in shining armor they are frequently portrayed to be.

The adversary of a system I disagree with is not automatically my ally. Just my two cents.

Peace.

a reply to: InMyShell

Assange is one man out of 7 billion and not exactly the most reliable commentator given his "I am better than everyone" attitude.

So take his opinion on board by all means. But ask a pauper in Calcutta too.

In Britain you have the royal family, in the States, you have the Bushes and the Clintons...

a reply to: InMyShell

Like if any other candidate will stop a war. Check USA history. If memory serves me USA is in a war since revolutionary war.
en.m.wikipedia.org...
So why will not things now change.

And Assange should know better, because "War, war never changes."

I agree. That said, anyone with functioning vision and hearing with even a rudimentary grasp of human interaction should know this.

Also, what alternatives exist? With the delegates all but locked in for her...and even if they weren't no good mainstream options...what else will we get?

Can anyone name a republican or democrat you truly, genuinely trust not to F@#$% up royally on the domestic AND global stage?

I'm sitting here in the middle thinking, "Dear God, where do we go from here?"

a reply to: saadad

True. It doesn't even seem to be about winning anymore, just keeping the gears of war greased and turning.

As a bomafied crazy person, I can't help wondering why this is what "sanity" looks like to so many people.

a reply to: Agit8dChop


She's far worse than an idiot she's a glory seeking idiot.She not only wants to be the 1st female president Hillary wants to be known as the woman who conquered the M.E.

originally posted by: Substracto
And Assange should know better, because "War, war never changes."

Maybe Assange does not know better.

Is there really any sane person who would vote for Hickory Dickery Cock?? It truly amazes me that there are so few folks who know the outcome is already orchestrated ! These wizards should move to the front of the class and take control. Sheer madness is quickly ascending from the black abyss. Strengthen the fortifications Jeeves!