WTF Do These Wikileaks Numbers Mean?---BREAKING

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: SudoNim

Again, your posts speak for themselves. You think "Lesser Degree Rape" is a "form of rape" when according to Sweden it is NOT.

Since you seem very confused: "Lesser degree Rape" is not considered "Rape" in Sweden, nor is it considered a "form of rape". That is why it is a separate charge. "Lesser Degree Rape" in Sweden means: sexual coercion, or, lying to get laid. You are thoroughly ignorant of what you are arguing.

Sweden updated their laws in 2005 to add these "not actually rape" scenarios into the Rape Protection laws and it has reflected in their countries statistucs as not you have a higher chance of getting "raped" in Sweden that anywhere else in the world.

For example, Sweden reformed its sex crime legislation and made the legal definition of rape much wider in 2005,[3][4][8][12] which largely explains a significant increase in the number of reported rapes in the ten-year period of 2004-2013.[13][14]

Your own quote, just proved you wrong. He is wanted by Sweden for investigation on rape charges. End of.

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: redmage

originally posted by: SudoNim
a reply to: redmage

How am I implying that?

So the answer is "no". You don't understand what you're implying at all.

Let me break it down for you.

originally posted by: SudoNim
It's not sensationalist to call lesser-degree rape... rape. It is a form of rape.

Is the rough equivalent of saying, "It's not sensationalist to call consensual intercourse... non-consensual intercourse. It is a form of non-consensual intercourse."

So i'm so how being sensationalist and also implying something when stating the FACT that Assange is wanted by Sweden for rape allegations.

Give me a break.

====

The elephant in the room is that
Julian Assange has a GIGANTIC EGO!

As a person with some investigative operations
experience, I have seen that those big egos TEND to
have an overly large sense of ENTITLEMENT with regards
to their desires for fame, fortune, sexual satisfaction
and/or political power and control.

It actually WOULD NOT SURPRISE ME that the assertions
of the other parties in his "legal problem" are for the most
part GENERALLY TRUE.

There are LARGE DISCREPENCIES between men's and women's
perception of a given sexual encounter and AT THE TIME,
even IF there was an IMPLIED CONSENT between the parties,
there may have been enough of a legally demonstrable gross
power-imbalance that the charges against Assange would,
in a many countries' courts of law, become actionable.

I personally think Assange has such a huge ego that
it got the best of him to such a point he basically ignored
the stated or implied reservations of the other party.
I suspect that NO ANGRY PHYSICAL COERCION (i.e. no violent rape)
was present but that a more general psychological pressure
was applied to such an extent that the country of Sweden
thinks it has a VALID LEGAL CASE to make again Assange!

I would say just get the case over with and check out
BOTH SIDES of the story. I think it will come down to
basic differences in perception of a given sexual encounter.

On a LEGAL BASIS, I would defer to the Swedish judge
as to whether or not differences in perception without
actual violence is considered a valid and actionable legal case.

Using a typical male-centric analogy, just because
someone emotionally manipulates and uses you to
get cheap sex doesn't mean you can LEGALLY call it rape!

Vice versa, just because someone lets you use them
and meekly defers to your psychological manipulation
to obtain cheap sex doesn't mean it CAN'T SOMETIMES
be legally called rape!

That is for the judge and/or jury to decide!

====

Now the BIG ISSUE IS are these allegations being used
to further a political agenda by the United States
intelligence apparatus to stifle or eliminate
disclosures of politically SENSITIVE data
that COULD AFFECT the outcome of
an entire Presidential and Congressional
election cycle?!

Again, what is SO DAMAGING in the archived
documents of past operations and dealings such
that Hillary Clinton and/or President Obama and/or
the rest of the US Intelligence Agency apparatus is
all up in arms about Julian Assange's Wikileaks
websites and Insurance files?

I am sooo curious as what IS being
hidden from us Jane and Jo Q. Public!


We MIGHT be able to find out sooner
rather than later if I can help do
something about the early breaking
of these Wikileaks Insurance Files!

Who knows......!!!!!!!

Wikileaks confirmed on twitter Ecuador shut down his internet.

They have been released for people to use in order to check the authenticity of the "insurance" files if they are ever released.

a reply to: StargateSG7

golly buddy,

i was following your academic thread and was getting all butt hurt because i felt you were
upstaging the lunacy i bring...in terms of ego

thanks

a reply to: FauxMulder

My guess is that they won't put any further pressure on Ecuador, the powers being happy with cutting him off from what little bit of the world that he has been taking part in for the past four years. Any further moves to threaten Ecuador or Assange will result in the opening of what I believe is some very damning information not only about Clinton but Kerry and rest of our illustrious leaders.

I'm really interested in seeing the Kerry file.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical Yeah it's called "challenge/confirmation." It's a security challenge. This is used in field operations where an intelligence asset has to confirm a challenge. The challenge for instance is i'll given an example: If three years ago in the plan of action (COMMITMENT) an email was sent that had coded data in it...i.e. reference to a keyword or something that no one knew at the time was occurring in the operation then you simply confirm the challenge that your intelligence is better than the opponents. It's widely used in today's modern information warfare tactics to drive the combatant side back to a "RETHINK and ADJUSTMENT phase." This is the imperative of this particular strategy and goal. It stands to reason if someone says, we didn't know that then...so therefore we know they were watching us this whole time....then the enemy thinks. My assets are compromised and so on...i'll have to re-locate them or test if this was original intent 3 years ago etc.. This often leads to new information from the advancing side whose perception of data is that if I can confirm to you that my people were ahead of you the whole time, then I have been watching you and you are all exposed so nothing you can do, will be news to us. So play on...and i'll get more of your resources in a DEADLOCK and unwilling to comitt to further damaging actions . When this occurs a Center of Gravity shift is often seen by an enemy group who then outsources intelligentsia and other assets to re-question if they are missing some vital element--THE PRIMARY GOAL IS TO INCREASE PERCEPTION OF MOBILIZATION NUMBERS IN MILITARY TACTICS and open your DECOYS to further DANGLE an operation life cycle as it impossible to find a truth and not question WHO DID THIS? WHAT GROUP HELPED? HOW MANY DO THEY HAVE? ADN THIS IN TURN becomes a force multiplier. Another example...if i entered a case inquiry with an assumption of a crime being committed then i committed my assets to the investigation then I began operating around a false pretext then i have exposed assets to a false pretext. So when the real pretext is entered into Challenge/Confirmation...i.e. I am investigating this and we should both work together then this is non-adversarial use. It is used in higher echelons of leadership who require certain assets to be regulated in other offices and thus creates a better leadership in interdependency of agency working relations. I.e. we now have common goal and should align our special interest. This point is given that NON-adversarial and Adversarial are the two functions of such a question posed about Julian Assange and "pre-commitment." We all assume it's adversarial or some scheme intended to relay to a "cut-out," who has knowledge or to tempt an asset to utilize it or that some how the current Secretary of State John Kerry perceives this as antagonistic...but more than likely if claims of Russian influence operations exist...it can be argued he is directly communicating with Kerry to challenge data that only a few with access can know to develop a trace-root. In any event...it's pretty much FISHING/PROBING and has elements of enabling Secretary of State to see what is or is not issues with Former Secretary of State and can be a access to threats or a scheme for Amnesty for quitting in issues impacting current secretary of state career. Implied that if trump gets elected by some DAMNING content Julian is set to release...then...in theory he's offering contrition to S.o.S. for amnesty. Meaning...he may be playing the SECSTATE to a deal...simple. Trump will not have Kerry as SECSTATE and if clinton podesta e-mails not working as he hoped then...who knows.

originally posted by: FauxMulder
Wikileaks confirmed on twitter Ecuador shut down his internet.

Why would they do that?

a reply to: FauxMulder

It won't take long to get him back online. They'll probably get him a MiFi or a PtP wireless backhaul soon enough. Besides, most of the WikiLeaks stuff is housed outside of the Ecuadorian Embassy anyways and managed by an outside team. Having Julian cut off from the internet is a nuisance, but probably wont cripple WikiLeaks.

I'm betting Julian has a means to be back online, regardless of Ecuador, by tomorrow.


a reply to: Realtruth

Pressure from the US government is my guess. Kerry is reportedly in London, too.

originally posted by: jedi_hamster
FFS, since when is this thread about Assange's sex adventures?

Agreed this is not the OP or the topic. Seems like people are trying to derail the thread.

originally posted by: SoulOfCeres

a reply to: Realtruth


Pressure from the US government is my guess. Kerry is reportedly in London, too.

Thanks for the reply.

Seriously sad days.

At first I was skeptical about Assange, but now I know that he has the goods, on the bad guys, because of what they are doing to him.

I can't wait till everything is finally release, or at least the beginning. I don't think this is ever going to end now.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

Let me explain how a dead man's switch works. If someone doesn't receive specific messages at specific intervals, they do specific actions.

Jaden

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: Hazardous1408

Let me explain how a dead man's switch works. If someone doesn't receive specific messages at specific intervals, they do specific actions.

Jaden

Well whatever brain surgeon at the US government level had Julian isolated, turned into a huge turd for them, because this will release a flood of documents and info that will most likely be devastating.

What a bunch of tards. smh

What do you think Pam really snuck in to Julian?

or out

a reply to: SoulOfCeres

Agreed. Also, wouldn't you think he had a cell phone? 4G should be plenty to browse the internet in the meantime.

a reply to: StargateSG7

We MIGHT be able to find out sooner rather than later if I can help do something about the early breaking of these Wikileaks Insurance Files!

Males me wonder how many people are thinking just like you.

Internet is about to be yanked.. I see a false flag coming lol

a reply to: StargateSG7

But at the very least, I WILL INVESTIGATE the possibilities and report YAY or NAY on the results!

PLEASE make me aware of when you post the results or U2U me. I'm anxious to see what you can come up with. If you can break this... WOW.. I mean WOW! I just hope nothing happens to you. Have you thought about that or am I being too paranoid?

Thanks in advance!!

a reply to: FauxMulder


There were early claims that cell phones in the embassy were seized.

Personally, I'm curious if this is all merely drumming up hype for maximum exposure of an upcoming release, or if someone is trying to call his bluff and cut him off thus forcing the dead man's switch to go live.