Will Julian Assange end up dead?

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Plotus

Whistleblowing was once encouraged several administrations back.

If wrongdoing is found should it not be exposed ?
Or are certain institutions above the law ?

Condoning law breaking in the name of "National Security" is a slippery slope.

It is not a violation of law to expose violations of law. Similarly, you can't be guilty of violating the law if the investigators violated the law to begin an investigation. That is why many guilty people "get off" on technicalities.
Refer here.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

But it is a violation of law to expose violations of law after a court tells you that you can't expose those violations of law because your whistleblowing concerning those violations would collapse the government. What's interesting is that even though you can't name names and do the expose dance, you also can't destroy the evidence.

I know this for a fact. I have the Superior Court gag orders (injunctions) to prove it.

Cheers - Dave

Not inconceivable, but doubtful. He's far too high profile imho.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: KansasGirl

Yeah, that sounds like some good reasoning to create an international incident, huh???

"Mr. Assange, we've had to feed your cat twice now and now he's peed on the fake Aztec relic we stole from the Mexicans! Plus, you've been using the internet to access ATS after 10pm again which is not allowed! We told you about this for the last time...now GET OUT!!"

And the public would believe it!

For evidence I refer you to another Wikileaks thread today, where one of our Silly Old members has suggested that Assange was kicked out of the embassy because he is a pig.

an obvious question - for those attempting to create a conspiracy out of ecuadors descision to eject him [ assange ] from thier embassy

how long do you think they " should " allow him to stay ???????????????

originally posted by: SgtHamsandwich

Time to call bluff ?

I'm not sure that assassination is really a necessary step in this day and age.

Hell, people can freely speak on publicly available record, and it can all be mangled to say whatever is desired. And, people will believe it.

Why bother when you can turn their attempts to speak out into edit fodder? Don't even need to bother with censoring original, unedited footage when it comes down to it.

We are still in a transitional period into this New Order though, so there may be some that still operate "traditionally."

No.
I won't say why I said no, because he was let go on an insurance policy. A political insurance policy.