Wikileaks Exposed - The man behind the NWO Curtain

reply to post by boondock-saint

However in adhering to the court orders, he gave up
the address of Vaughan Smith. No secret there.
The secret they wanted to keep quiet was the connection
between Smith and Soros. And that is the connection
that I found and brought to light.

Secret? What did you do, hack the site to get the info??
Everything you've posted is readily available on the net..
No secrets, no attempts to hide this nefarious plan..

This whole thread is based on information any 12 year old could find with a quick google search..
Hardly a master plan or a hidden agenda...

Originally posted by backinblack
Everything you've posted is readily available on the net..
No secrets, no attempts to hide this nefarious plan..

This whole thread is based on information any 12 year old could find with a quick google search..
Hardly a master plan or a hidden agenda...

no attempts to hide
or no secrets ??? lol

well there have been quite a few posters on here
who have attacked this thread for some odd reason.
If this info was readily available on the net, why did
they attack me for posting it ???

and if Julian has no secrets, why don't
he give up his donors list ????

hmmmmm

no secrets huh ???

reply to post by boondock-saint

no attempts to hide
or no secrets ??? lol

well there have been quite a few posters on here
who have attacked this thread for some odd reason.
If this info was readily available on the net, why did
they attack me for posting it ???

and if Julian has no secrets, why don't
he give up his donors list ????

hmmmmm

no secrets huh ???

Did I say something wrong?
Did you not get all this "secret" info from the net?

Many organisations do NOT show their donor list in full..
Even most political parties and reps..
Nothing new or unusual there..
If that's all you really have, it ain't much..

Originally posted by backinblack
Did you not get all this "secret" info from the net?

yes I did, however the dots had to be
put together by me. There was no one
source on the web for all the evidence
posted in this thread. It had to be
data mined by hand to fit all these
pieces together. By MSM not connecting
all these pieces together that I have
here in this thread, then they are
indirectly responsible for hiding
the truth. MSM gives u 1 lil bit of
info over here and another lil bit
over there but they won't connect
the dots between the two.

This thread doesn't look like a
thread anymore, it looks more like
a federal indictment with a huge list
of charges. In this case, it should.

reply to post by boondock-saint

This thread doesn't look like a
thread anymore, it looks more like
a federal indictment with a huge list
of charges. In this case, it should.

If all the blogs you cite as truth are right, then I agree..
But in all honesty it's all about Soros..

I don't see any tangible proof of Julian Assange doing anything wrong in all that has been said in this thread..

Maybe you can point out the facts that lead to Mr Assange's Indictment..
After all, the thread is about Wikileaks, not Soros...

Originally posted by backinblack
I don't see any tangible proof of Julian Assange doing anything wrong in all that has been said in this thread..
Maybe you can point out the facts that lead to Mr Assange's Indictment..

well first of all "intent" determines
whether or not laws were broken here.

wikileaks intent was to sabotage
and extort and blackmail an entire
country: America.

So thusly receiving those documents
with the intent to sabotage, extort
and blackmail is a crime.

Distribution of those documents
with the same intent above is another
crime.

Conspiring with others to sabotage a
country is sedition. If Julian is not a
US Citizen then it becomes an act of
war. It becomes a cyber attack on
US Sovereignty by the entity and
their conspirators, including funding
sources. International espionage
and mass propaganda to illegally direct
foreign policy of a nation is blackmail
and extortion against a nation.

There are many different routes
a prosecutor could go with this case.

Wikileaks could be charged
Julian Assange could be charged
George Soros could be charged

reply to post by boondock-saint


Mass propoganda???
Are you for real??

No one, and I MEAN no one has even hinted at one of these cables being fake..

You can't be accused of propoganda for telling the truth...

Epic fail Boon....

BTW, even the Australian Federal Police have now confirmed Julian Assange comitted no crime..
Maybe you should send your info to them..

reply to post by backinblack


While the thread is Wikileaks, it is also the man behind the NWO....
You know, I still aint read nothing at all, that you have written that makes any sense.
A couple of pages back you stated, "Im done with this thread".
Look at how many pages deep this thread has gone into, look at how many links Boon and others have provided, what have you provided? Apart from stating your opinion 50 times lol
You know, opinions are like azzholes, everybodys got one, remember that.
The only thing I can come up with is, your purposely trying to derail the thread.
You are going out of your way to come on this thread and just say 50 times, that you dont agree.
Calling the OP names, youre pathetic.
I mean, you are pathetic.

Originally posted by boondock-saint
Conspiring with others to sabotage a
country is sedition. If Julian is not a
US Citizen then it becomes an act of
war.

What do you mean "if"? He isn't a US citizen, therefore it's war, right? So the US should declare war on Mr Assange? Should they invade him and enact regime change? Or should they just send air sorties to knock out his key infrastructure?

Wikileaks could be charged
Julian Assange could be charged
George Soros could be charged

And if anyone on the planet, apart from 8 conspiracy nuts, was taking any notice of this thread you'd be charged with libel. Seriously, can you imagine trying to defend yourself in court:

"Well, err, there's this blog where they said this stuff, and err, Mr Soros is the NWO. How do I know that? Well, err, he's rich and funds some liberal organisations and charities...so he must be. Have I got any documentary supporting evidence? Well, err, not really. But I did Google the the terms "Soros" and "Wikileaks" quite a bit, and found these other blogs. That doesn't count?? Ah...."

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
So the US should declare war on Mr Assange? Should they invade him and enact regime change? Or should they just send air sorties to knock out his key infrastructure?

they do it everyday against targets in Iraq, Afghan and Pakistan
called Al Queda and Taliban and insurgent movements.
And not one single country in that list attacked us or
spread disinfo on the web.

which is worse:
A country that does nothing to us?
or
An entity that attacks and blackmails and extorts America for an agenda??

the guise of freedom of speech is but a charade
for the real agenda.

and here is you another reason why wikileaks
is doing this. The NSA just announced their
secure networks are vulnerable and they plan
to implement new systems to secure it.
I wonder how much of a budget increase is
in store for DOD contractors associated
with this massive security upgrade?
Defense funding !!!!!

Where have we heard this before ???

ummm, let's see !!!

Terrorists have attacked us and we need
billions and billions to go stomp them out.
Sound familiar ???

The U.S. government's main code-making and code-cracking agency now works on the assumption that foes may have pierced even the most sensitive national security computer networks under its guard.

"There's no such thing as 'secure' any more," Debora Plunkett of the National Security Agency said on Thursday amid U.S. anger and embarrassment over disclosure of sensitive diplomatic cables by the web site WikiLeaks.

www.foxnews.com...

wikileaks is actually mentioned by name !!!

The United States can't put its trust "in different components of the system that might have already been violated," Plunkett added in a rare public airing of NSA's view on the issue. "We have to, again, assume that all the components of our system are not safe, and make sure we're adjusting accordingly."

The NSA must constantly fine tune its approach, she said, adding that there was no such thing as a "static state of security."

constantly fine tune huh ???
How much is that gonna cost the US Taxpayers ???

all of this due to wikileaks releases.
what a coincidence???

and here is a note worth mentioning.
Bradley Manning got the data from the networks
out via memory stick, not a computer network
attack. So why use the wikileaks releases as
a basis for increased funding for hacking?

It's just hype and disinfo to get funding
and to limit access to the internet.

It has nothing to do with freedom of speech.

Originally posted by Dr Cosma
reply to post by backinblack

 

While the thread is Wikileaks, it is also the man behind the NWO....

You know, I still aint read nothing at all, that you have written that makes any sense.
A couple of pages back you stated, "Im done with this thread".
Look at how many pages deep this thread has gone into, look at how many links Boon and others have provided, what have you provided? Apart from stating your opinion 50 times lol
You know, opinions are like azzholes, everybodys got one, remember that.
The only thing I can come up with is, your purposely trying to derail the thread.
You are going out of your way to come on this thread and just say 50 times, that you dont agree.
Calling the OP names, youre pathetic.
I mean, you are pathetic.

LMFAO..No, you are pathetic..
And abuse the right to have an opinion/azzhole as you so elequently put it..
EVERY post and link in this thread boils down to OPINIONS..
There is NO hard proof of any of it...

I have NOT called Boon names in fact we get on very well...
I suggest that it is YOU, not me, that have added little to this thread..

Boon is also aware that U stopped posting in this thread due to childish attacks as you have just shown..

reply to post by boondock-saint

well first of all "intent" determines
whether or not laws were broken here.

wikileaks intent was to sabotage
and extort and blackmail an entire
country: America.

So thusly receiving those documents
with the intent to sabotage, extort
and blackmail is a crime.

Distribution of those documents
with the same intent above is another
crime.

All just assumptions and opinions Boon..
Many believe Wikileaks intent is to show the world the US and other Governments constantly lie about everything..
Also, the crime is in the stealing although that's even a murky point given that most western countries have some form of "whistle blower" protection laws..
There are obviously some secrets that even the Government agree shouldn't be secrets..

It's still a fact that the entire weight of Australian resources could NOT find where Julian or Wikileaks have comitted a crime..
And I'm certain our foreign PM pushed as hard as she could to prove a crime..

Originally posted by backinblack
Boon is also aware that U stopped posting in this thread due to childish attacks as you have just shown..

oh my, are u interjecting words into boon's mouth ??
I did not say such nor do I think such.
I have a voice, I can type how I feel.
I do not need somebody to hold
my hand to do so.

Don't bring boon into ur lil squabble.

Originally posted by backinblack
All just assumptions and opinions Boon..

then u haven't been paying
attention for over 50 pages.

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by backinblack
Boon is also aware that U stopped posting in this thread due to childish attacks as you have just shown..

oh my, are u interjecting words into boon's mouth ??
I did not say such nor do I think such.
I have a voice, I can type how I feel.
I do not need somebody to hold
my hand to do so.

Don't bring boon into ur lil squabble.

That U was meant to be an I..
Typo, my fingers are to big and U & I are next to eachother...

Originally posted by backinblack
That U was meant to be an I..

Typo, my fingers are to big and U & I are next to eachother...

lol
I guess spellcheck wouldn't
fix that lil debacle

hahahaha

reply to post by backinblack

That U was meant to be an I.. Typo, my fingers are to big and U & I are next to eachother...

Then just do it the fun way and switch them around,or if your lucky like me your kids do it for you unannounced, keeps others guessing what your typing as well!!!!!

Originally posted by jaynkeel
reply to post by backinblack

 

That U was meant to be an I.. Typo, my fingers are to big and U & I are next to eachother...

Then just do it the fun way and switch them around,or if your lucky like me your kids do it for you unannounced, keeps others guessing what your typing as well!!!!!

lol, what fun your kids sound..
Mine obviously haven't thought of that idea yet..

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by backinblack
All just assumptions and opinions Boon..

then u haven't been paying
attention for over 50 pages.

You are not supposed to pick out one line of a post to answer..
There was more to that post..