WikiLeaks founder given peace award

Originally posted by thePharaoh

Originally posted by R3N3G4D3
Screw that, he needs the Nobel prize, I mean Obama got it for what?? Being the first black President?? Julian Assange is a good man, even with all this sexual assault baloney, he kept a cool head. Good for him.

haahaha...for bieng the first black president lololololll

no..he got it for, iraq, afghan, health care, and especially for rejuvenating the image of the US in foreign lands.

Actually Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize a month after being officially sworn into office as President. That's why most of the media reported it as great news but at the same time questioned why he was given that so soon when he'd only been US President for 30 days and had done nothing in that time to warrant such an award.

reply to post by BanMePlz

Would you care to explain precisely what disinformation he is guilty of spreading, and provide firm evidence to back up your theory? I'm sure if you could reliably do that, many around here would be grateful

reply to post by HardbeatAcolyte


So far, wikileaks has released nothing valuable to "truthers". He just propagates the whole middle east war and says Osama bin laden was behind it...

If you want proof, go and find it yourself, im not your babysitter.

reply to post by BanMePlz

Has it occurred to you that your perception of 'truth' is subjective, and may not be infallible?
Just because he hasn't had any information to release saying that Osama was CIA, 9/11 was an inside job, or any other popular conspiracy theory of your choice, does not prove that he is working for the system. I think you are too quick to jump to conclusions.
Also, if you are going to say that Assange is disinfo, then the burden of proof is upon you, the accuser. You're simply trying to shift the responsibility to me because you are unwilling to provide strong support for your own claim.
And what if the truthers are correct, but Assange is just in the dark about it like most others?

reply to post by HardbeatAcolyte


this reply really isnt worth my time, but i will reply for the sake of "real" closure.


And what if the sky is really red? Im sorry but you are wrong... Reality is not subjective...

You go on with your "subjective reality" I know that reality is not subjective but an observable phenomenon.

You want proof? Like I said, go find it yourself, im not your babysitter. People will never learn the truth unless they seek it for themselves anyway. You want proof? then the burden of proof is on yourself. And simply stated, NO, i wont provide you anything, period. Find it yourself!


The fact remains that ASSange or WIKIleaks has not released any information with any real substance and they are just "disinformationists". Fact remains that they have not realeased any info on E.T. either and they are just catering to the emotional needs of the decieved public in order to keep them ensnared in the net of B.S.

Though you are welcome to believe whatever you want, which is why im not gonna waste my time playing your games trying to prove it to you.

sounds to me like you are making this impossible,you make claims with no credible evidence,and say the burden of proof lies with the other guy.You can either back up this with evidence for us to peruse,or keep on whistling in the dark.YOU make the point,YOU need to back it up...otherwise you just need to fade into the woodwork as you have absolutely nothing to add but B.S.
on another note congrats Assange,they should give him Obama's nobel,Obama didn't earn it

Originally posted by BanMePlz
this reply really isnt worth my time, but i will reply for the sake of "real" closure.

My apologies if I'm wasting your time. By all means, if you find this conversation boring, you have my leave to pursue something more notable

Originally posted by BanMePlz
And what if the sky is really red? Im sorry but you are wrong... Reality is not subjective...

What is red? What is blue? What if one man's red is another man's blue? He will have called the colour of the sky blue all his life, so from his perception of reality the sky would be blue. This is an extremely simplistic example, but it does show a possibility that our perception of reality may be significantly subjective.

Originally posted by BanMePlz
You go on with your "subjective reality" I know that reality is not subjective but an observable phenomenon.

Very well, I won't force you to believe otherwise. However, note that I say 'perception of reality' is subjective, not reality itself. For all I know, neither of us may be seeing reality for what it really is, because it is viewed through the gauze of individual perception.

Originally posted by BanMePlz
You want proof? Like I said, go find it yourself, im not your babysitter. People will never learn the truth unless they seek it for themselves anyway. You want proof? then the burden of proof is on yourself. And simply stated, NO, i wont provide you anything, period. Find it yourself!

Fine with me. Just don't expect anyone to believe you when you begin trumpeting accusations without a willingness to provide the evidence yourself.

Originally posted by BanMePlz
The fact remains that ASSange or WIKIleaks has not released any information with any real substance and they are just "disinformationists". Fact remains that they have not realeased any info on E.T. either and they are just catering to the emotional needs of the decieved public in order to keep them ensnared in the net of B.S.

He hasn't proved that a god exists either, but you don't see me accusing him of being anti-theist disinformation. Or am I out of the loop and Assange has somehow claimed to 'prove' that extraterrestrials don't exist?

Originally posted by BanMePlz
Though you are welcome to believe whatever you want, which is why im not gonna waste my time playing your games trying to prove it to you.

Thank you, I guess we'll need to agree to disagree. Nice talking to you

reply to post by HardbeatAcolyte


EXCELLENT RESPONSE,I appreciate you not buying in,I would say your reply to***** was graceful to say the least...peace Ya'll

Originally posted by gary714
EXCELLENT RESPONSE,I appreciate you not buying in,I would say your reply to***** was graceful to say the least...peace Ya'll

Thank you
Added you to my friends list, I think we think alike, lol

Cool I appreciate the vote of confidence...
2nd...peace Ya'll

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by Invariance

 

I am no fan of WikiLeaks founder, i have always found these leaks highly suspicious.
dont get me wrong i used to believe in WikiLeaks before but sadly after reading some of these leaks, it looks like nothing like a real classified file or classified documents

classified written documents always have blurred out blanked out under official government names etc.

Is this a joke?

Of course OFFICIALLY RELEASED files will have personal identifying information and unreleased aspects blacked out, but that's not how the things are in the files, that's just what's done when legally released.

Wikileaks files have mostly not been through the official release process.

Well, whatever a person's opinion is, the fact remains that the man has won a humanitarian award, and the man has been supported by other countries for his work.

Unlike some other people, I don't make up the news, this is real news.. FACT

So for those of you who disagree, that's nice. You have a right to your opinion. I don't think it's right for you to try to force your opinion on people who believe otherwise.

I guess it's like chocolate cake, some people love it.. some like it.. and others can't stand it. AND the ones who like it, can't understand why others hate it. It's always the way... but no one will ever convince me to hate chocolate cake!

Personal opinions aside, I really don't believe the Aussies would have given a prestigious to someone undeserving. It's a humanitarian award, not chocolate cake

You can doubt whats been released all you want but the source of the material have sometimes weakly denied it's genuine but mostly have been confirmed fact.

Whats been released was released by an organization that did so seemingly as soon as possible not waiting for a century when we can "understand" what choices people with the same IQ made.

Most importantly however it gave us the rise of truly secure anonymous drop boxes for news worthy material which has been utlized by other outlets.

And it also gave us rise to a number of copycats all looking to explore the same thread of open government.

Julian Assange created wiki leaks which gave us all of these things plus the information.

You know what the poster who called him a twat gave us - nothing

This thread is disheartening to say the least. Assange the Intelligence puppet sweeping up the accolaydes of the people that should easily see him for what he is. A media personality rolled out right in time for the next 30 year phase. As Sunstein clearly stated in the New York Times, there is a systemic need for Wikileaks as a disinformation mechanism to sway geo-political events & the minds of those looking for "transparency". Please look at what the real founders of Wikileaks have to say about this Media Puppet & the co-opting of said Entity. It's all there folks, right in the open for all to see. Don't get bogged down in the Kool-Aid. Shouldn't Humanitarian Awards to shadowy Media figures be at all suspect by now? Deny Ignorance.

Interestingly, I was looking at the news and found this:
Wikileaks: US opens grand jury hearing

The US government has opened a grand jury hearing into the passing of hundreds of thousands of state secrets to WikiLeaks – the start of the process of deciding whether to prosecute the website and its founder, Julian Assange, for espionage.

Apparently they can force a testimony?

The first session of the grand jury is understood to have begun in Alexandria, Virginia, with the forced testimony of a man from Boston, Masachusetts. The unidentified man was subpoenaed to appear before the panel.

They are attempting to see if he has violated the law:

not necessarily limited to, conspiracy to communicate or transmit national defense information in violation of the Espionage Act.

The American Military Specialist Bradley Manning has been court marshaled as the suspected leak.

he authorities would need to be able to prove to the satisfaction of a jury that they had actively encouraged or assisted the source of the leaks to transmit unauthorized material.

Mmm, that would HAVE to mean that what was leaked was TRUE, no?

The FBI has been focusing its investigations aggressively on the hacker community of Boston, around the technology university MIT, in the hope of gaining information on how Assange made contact with his source.

What hacker in their right mind would HELP the FBI? (Personal opinion: a hacker who's plea-bargaining)

It goes on to say that there are currently 5 separate prosecutions relating to official leaks causing

a surge in activity that national security experts say is a worrying attack on the rights of whistle blowers.

At this point, they're saying it's a sort of pre-trial basically to see if they can get enough dirt to prosecute.


So much for Julian making this stuff up, huh?

reply to post by iagainsti


Maybe, but it's his butt on the line when the SHTF.
(see above article)

Congratulations to Julian Assange for the peace prize. Now, what about Mr Manning?

Originally posted by Skittle
Congratulations to Julian Assange for the peace prize. Now, what about Mr Manning?

Sadly, Mr. Manning has been court marshaled by the USA.

See article above

"A former WikiLeaks spokesman has condemned Julian Assange for demanding workers for the website sign "confidentiality agreements" threatening penalties of up to $18 million."

If this is true it fits. Asange was an idiot and he is now what he condemned which is wonderful.

And he gets a peace prize..... ! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

reply to post by daggyz

If WikiLeaks employees aren't going to work as a team, and instead release information (which may not yet be properly edited to protect the innocent, unlike WikiLeaks' official releases) before they are supposed to, then why should they be a part of the WikiLeaks team in the first place? If they don't like it, they can follow Daniel Domscheit-Berg's example and do it their own way, independent of WikiLeaks. That is only fair, in my opinion.