only the internet gives something like this a chance to survive without governmental or some other form of funding.

but dont donate through paypal. paypal repeatedly blocked the accounts of wikileaks without any reason

OK so some money making douche bag is trying to imply it takes hundreds of thousands of dollars to host documents read by a few nerds and conspiracy theorists.

Oh please. How full of themselves are they.
All they need to do is obtain the info, and simply provide links/mirrors, if the link gets taken down, they add another.

Wikileaks is STILL the focal point, so even if the source file changes, it'll still be pointed out by Wiki (or maybe MD5/6 etc!) and what's to say you can trust the people at Wiki?

Oh I forgot, this is the internet, everything is true and the GVT is evil.

No excuse me while I navigate to wikipedia.org and live my life by the words of "USER GENERATED CONTENT". Run by a Russian too!

The internet is amusing because its a model for showing how stupid most people are. Its like you can't trust this, but, you can trust us.

What if one day the motives of Wikileaks change?
What if its bought out?
Or used to manipulate people?

Its really best just to form your own opinion on anything.

The second wikileaks is seen as something that can become influential, is when it will be targetted?
If you do not have a big enough interest in current affairs to make your own mind up, then as far as I'm concerned you're an easy target.

You don't need to be a genius to know GVT's, companies, people lie.

You have no idea what wikileaks is about - most of their cost doesn't go to web-hosting but to hundreds of million dollar lawsuits from corporations trying to take it down.

Its really best just to form your own opinion on anything.

Yes, let's all just guess. Information is overrated.

Explain to me how you know the information you read there is factual? Let me guess cos it conflicts with a big corporatation and that appeals to your net nerd persona?

Because some eco net warrior is keeping it real?
Do you know who he is?
Do you know his religious or political motivations?
I'm not saying take it down, I am saying he does not need such a hideous amount of moeny to run the site.

The bottom line is this, IF you have a big enough interst in current affairs then you should be able to make your own mind up.

The GVT told millions of people that the war was in the middle east was essential, how convincing is that?

Conclusion?

People are not blind idiots that believe everything they are told.
And more importnatly, you should not take anything Wikileaks takes as gospel.

There are already enough tards on the internet who quote like Wikipedia like it was written by the new messiah.

Explain to me how you know the information you read there is factual?

Depends which information you're talking about. I know the leaked loan books from various big-banks(like Kaupthing bank) showing their corruption in the prelude to the recession were real. I know the leaked Guantánamo Bay procedures was real. I know the BNP membership list leak was real - maybe that's what's bothering you?

If you knew anything about it you'd know usually there isn't a question of the documents being false but simply that they are classified documents that these corporations/countries don't want to be made public, hence the million dollar lawsuits (they're not suing for falsification but the publication of their private documents - Wikileaks usually(if not always) wins these cases btw)

Because some eco net warrior is keeping it real?

Again, you have no clue what wikileaks is. It's not some random internet guy with a blog, it's many people, mostly investigative journalists and lawyers all-over the world.

I'm not saying take it down, I am saying he does not need such a hideous amount of moeny to run the site.

Yes, he does. Again: hundreds of law suits every year plus hundreds of employes across the globe (and over a thousand registered volunteers).

Do you know who he is?

Yes, the people who run the site aren't anonymous and they get interviewed all the time.

The GVT told millions of people that the war was in the middle east was essential, how convincing is that?

If only there were people dedicated to finding out the truth when politicians lie and relay it to us. Like, they could put it in a web-page of sorts. If everyone knew the governments were lying at the time they couldn't have invaded Iraq - politicans are powerless if not for consent from the civilians.


There's always a possibility(in fact actuality) of misleading information already in the main-stream media, should we shut all press down then?

well played

zing!

The founder of wikileaks is a convinced computer hacker who broke into MOD and NASA and had a mental breakdown by 25 years old.

I bet you didn't read that on wikileaks. Enjoy your role model. ROFL.

the information about his hacking career is on wikipedia. Hardly a secret.

You just proved you intelligence by clearly not understanding what kind of information are supposed to be on wikileaks.

i.e. the info that you are moron isn't, because everyone already knows that.

ROFL

I wouldn't hold it against anyone who had a mental breakdown (if he did.) Though, if you're interested in knowing more about him:
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2006496,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2006789,00.html

I take you're happy about the Afghanistan leak, then?

Of what is he convinced?

If you mean convicted then:
a) lots of people do stupid things when they're in their rebellious teenage years, does that mean none can be trusted or do good things once they grow up?
b) whatever the shortcomings of his past may be, it doesn't make his current project and it's goals any less laudable.

The only thing I really disagree on with wikileaks.org is the appeal to emotions used for example when they released the video of the apache firing on civilians, although factual the article and video used loaded messages to appeal to emotions rather than remaining impartial and rational. This, to me, is crossing the line into propaganda and lacks journalistic integrity. They seem to have improved on that front since that incident though.

People are not blind idiots that believe everything they are told.

Yeah! We ask for proof when someone is going to make claims about anything! You tell 'em!

something something these forum demographics something something

TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT FAILED PUN TEXT

wut?

How did you like my Jamerio impression?

ah, got it :D

works!!

stupid post is stupid

You didn't make any sense until you mentioned the russians. Fuck those russians!!!! I'll never read wikipedia again. Thanks Jamerio :)

People that dismiss wikipedia usually don't scroll down far enough to read References:. Of course, you can always choose to believe nothing you read, ever. But yeah I had no idea wikipedia was under the influence of the Russians, fucking KGB.

I made an interesting discovery when I saw a point which didn't make any sense to me. I followed the reference to an actual scientific article, which made the same conclusion. That conclusion was based on a graphics and when I looked at that, I found that the author had mixed up points 12 and 13.

So, I can't really blame the wiki authors for the mistake, but still it means that wiki can be wrong simply by quoting mistakes in articles that are otherwise legit.

true and that's the beauty of the references, you can look them up and see for yourself how reliable they are.

yes, of course.

But if their point hadn't seemed so wrong to me, I don't think I would have looked.
And therein lies the danger, I think.
In the example, the line was quoted to me by someone who obviously did trust it.


You can read it here. But I must warn you, that site is full of freaks!

or like that one time when this guy quoted wikipedia and told you optical mice were not analog devices. that was so wrong.

are you talking about the guy who never managed to write that himself?

yea the article he quoted turned out to be completely wrong saying that a mouse has a so called "DSP" which of course is an analog device.

yawn.

and therefore dear colleagues is why wikipedia is wrong. QED

Oh I remember you were the guy insited because wiki is correct once it must always be correct.
No need to check it.
Ever.

Lol.

Yeah please don't check it.
Ever.

Lol.

the whole world is digital and based on integer multiples of small electric charges

[ CITATION NEEDED ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomis

My point was that I really don't care about the nationality of the founders of Wikipedia. Wich would mean that my previous comment was sarcastic.

But to reply to this link: I'm guessing that this link is somehow "proof" of this russian connection. The only reference to Russia I can see on the page is the location of the headquarters wich is "St. Petersburg, Florida, United States" like the city in Russia too.

From Wikipedia:
Saint Petersburg (disambiguation)

Saint Petersburg is the second-largest city in Russia.

Saint Petersburg may also refer to the following places in the United States:

* St. Petersburg, Florida
* St. Petersburg, Pennsylvania

Maybe you are a retard?

Maybe[...]?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swansea,_California

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow,_Idaho


Are you retarded or something?

Didn't we already establish this? I'm confused?

Just mocking the village idiot.

Actually when I originally read what led me to say about Russia/Moscow ehatever I simply read St Peterburg ,there was no mention of it being in America. So when I linked there it had the full info.

When you hear the words St Petersburg, most people would think of Russia, especially as the source did not say (Florida/USA), which is why I said what I did. Fair assumption.

Google also thinks the same.

http://www.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&q=st...mp;bih=806

Let's face it most of you call people idiots for getting information wrong on things you have no clue about to begin with.

I bet none of you had even heard of Bomis" before I mentioned it.
though naturally you'll claim otherwise. And I bet the words St Petersburg conjure up the same images that google has.

There's an old saying that sums people like you you..

The only man who never makes mistakes is the man who never does anything

Enjoy angry laptop warriors.

hahahhaha, great post :D


You make a mistake, people point it out and try to use it as an argument to show that you still know better.



Delusional² made my day :D:D:D:D:D

I made a mistake on a very mistakeable piece of information.

Its simply a fact that St Petersburg for most means Russia.

Even Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_petersburg

Even Google.
http://www.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&expI...mp;bih=806

The problem with you and people like you is you base your answers based on the person, and the reason for that is you're still licking your wounds.

That's why I can laugh, you say one thing, but show something else.

Even wikipedia and Google think St Peterburg is in Russia.

Not my fault the original source did not specify it was in the USA.
If I'm an idiot then so is google, but that's the sort of lengths and bias you need to go to.

It s good to see how highly tuned and opportunistic I have some of you :).

http://tinyurl.com/2v6lbvd

I liked the bit where you defined it as in the USA before hand then somehow hoped that such a minor detail would go unnoticed.

The irnoy of this is is if you enter st petersburg into google (and strip out the biased nature of your post by defining it further) even your own advice says what I did :)

what I did is this:

I went to your own wiki-link, copied the location, went to lmgtfy.com and pasted the location.
Then I posted the link here.

I know this must sound like quantum physics to you, but using the internet is really not that difficult.

Yes because that's the process everyone goes through when talking on the intenet.

P.S.
Thanks for the tip genius. Lol.

http://www.esreality.com/index.php?a=post&...pid1994001

true, it takes a bit a of time.


But fortunately, many people are actually capable of reading well enough to not miss the meaning of "Florida, United States" when it is written right next to a city's name.

I know you're bound by a condition which leads you to think you're smart when you just don't get it but let me break it down for you, so I can once again educate you and show the world your stupidity.

I read about Bomis 6 years ago (do a CTRL+F and you'll see I mentioned this here nearly a year ago)
Unlike you, I don't get every piece of information from the internet/wikipedia, I read it in an internet magazine and loosely recall them mentioning St Petersburg. And quite naturally assumed it was in Russia.

When I provided the wikipedia link, years later it was for the readers reference as most have no idea what bomis was.

I didn't check the link as I had no reason to believe it was in florida/USA, had I done so I would not have posted it.

You can continue to trip yourself up and draw negative conclusions of me based on your own stupidity if you want.

Keep trying to dig that hole and buy that perception.

the bottom line is your trying to make a huge deal out of someone thinking st petersburg was in russia and all you really do is just show how hard you'll try to turn something so simple into a big deal.

I'm simply pointing out what you're trying to do.

hahaha.

They should make a reality show with you: "An idiot on the internet"

Nice try, but you just got pulled apart in every attempt you made and now go back to general insults when you run out of lives.

Haha, tug your little bratwusrt and go back to bed.

Comment #10 @ 16:49 CET, 1 February 2010 >>
(Link, iMsg, Edit, Delete, Reply)
By jameriofox Jamerio +++' - Reply to #7
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomis

Not my fault the original source did not specify it was in the USA.

;)

In St. Petersburg, Florida you make wikipedia.
In St. Petersburg, Soviet Russia, wikipedia makes YOU

protip: writing "hung by your own logic" or "you fell into your own trap" will help you win arguments just as much as an imaginary bafta will help you get a job.

tbh I never even heard of st.petersburg RUSSIA/moscow or w/e

I immediately thought of florida though. Why you assuming? Why are you thinking common sense is common?

I'm sorry, you appear to have protracted the maximum two-day comeback period as followed by the unwritten ESR user guide by 301 days, therefore the comment (#103) shall be deemed void.

wikileaks isnt there to give you an opinion to follow, fucktard, it's supposed to be a place to anonymously share info so that people are allowed to follow their own opinion, rather than follow what a company/government portrays about itself.

moron

Whats the difference between following info on wikileaks and any other source?

Its just as open to exploitation and inaccuracy you gullable net tard.

None of you have a clue if what is written there is true or not, some is true, some might not be true and the more trust they get the more powerful it becomes to abuse. At least you know who is running the US GVT. Where is this info coming from?
You don't know, but will take it as a new higher truth from now on?

If you need wikileaks to draw a conclusion about the world and you're too stupid to read between the lines then there is no hope for you.

OMFG america slagged off someone in the world!

WOW WEEEE!
I bet Russia/China and all the other world leaders are completely innocent behind closed doors aswell when they are not poisoning people, killing reporters and their gvt funded hacking programs!

³

the ability to discern between relevant/true information and the irrelevant is one key aspect of intelligence. you apparently have none.

Jamerio delivers.

Out with a bang...

why do you always delete and edit posts?

I've long lost count of the angry and incoherent jamerio replies he has deleted.

admin access comes in handy :>

This from a guy that dedicated his first ever journal to me and then edited it 18 months later becaue that's how long it took you to cool down.

http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=768449

And what was my my crime some of you ask?

I minused every post the cunt made and his only currency of self worth took a beating. Great times eh booger.

Yeah I made am mistake, when I read about wikipedia it was about 6 years ago and i recall hearing St Peterburg. Geez I'm really sorry for vagualy recollecting that and pin poinintg it to Mother Russia.

I doubt most of you never even knew ther was a St Petersburg in Florida, or a Moscow in Idaho, so don't try and act like you did.

If you actually attempted to offer somethign a little more insightful that the boring drivel you come out with you might actually make a mistake too.

ahahah ... even for a minor mistake like this, you need to justify yourself with a white lie.

NOONON I DIDNT JUST OVER OR MISREAD IT I HEAR ABOUT IT SOME TIEM AGO THERE AND I REMEBERED IT AND YOU PEOPLE DONDT KNOW SHIT ABOUT FLORIDA LOL

laughable.

First and only journal mind you.

Also Wales sucks and you are fat and stupid.

I think that covers it.

Poor and black, you forgot to add.

Can't believe everything you think you read on wikipedia mate.

Because he is afraid that people will demean him.

oh lol

DEM SNEAKY RUSSIANS

journals written this year: 3

journals this year ruined by jamerio or people hating jamerio: 2


THANK YOU!

You know there is only one way out of this....

http://666kb.com/i/bgdxmmvhxgx92s2ya.jpg ?

link to third journal, please.

you did quite well there on your own, mister

:D

Jamerio is the rapha of trolling

Jamerio is not a troll.

Whoa

He is really that stupid. He forced himself into delusions of grandeur because he is past the point of playing off his stupidity as "trolling."

He also has sex with sheep.

He is also poor.

He is terrible at Street Fighter too. Even so, he continues to grind the hours of button mashing in hope that one day he will achieve his ultimate aspiration of becoming a pro gamer, or some foolish notion like that.

i heard he has a bafta

And like three businesses or something in his dreams.

don't forget being good at videogames

*the best

no m8, you can't be the best with keyboards that break..................................

but he is the best.

All that stops him ar the circumstances and that he only played 73 minutes of video games his entire life.

those few minutes ended in a bafta though!

no m8, you can't be the best with keyboards that break..................................

is he fucking u? i see

Error: You can only delete your own posts that have no replies

that blog is clearly run by intellignece agencies to discredit wikileaks.


amidoinitright?

Im starting to believe that yes, wikileaks isnt legit.

I was talking about the blog he linked.

And i was talking about what i think.

yea that's why USA is shitting bricks...

Dont understimate the elites. When we think we are there, they setup a show, we all believe it and they move on. Maybe WL is in fact a show to crackdown the Internets like they wanted for years, the timing with the COICA law is nearly perfect. Nothing is as it looks. Really dont know what to believe. Better to stay still and aware. Hope theyre legit and the shit starts to smell so people realise those at power get there by learning dirty tricks, the type i wouldnt enjoy doing, the rules of society are just sad like the man of yesterday. We need to evolve and discard a system that rewards evil. Thats why i prefer to work just enough to do the things i enjoy, now, rather than enlarging my (inexistant) bank account :) We are one.

Wow, that's alot of crazy in one blog post! r1ddler will love it.

Not enough commas.

Some of you guys sound kinda bitter.

Did your torrents jam at 99.9% or something?

ye my life sucks

Not the

best idea

to release documents containing the names of the people who help fight the Talibans...

omg WL did it again apparently
where can i download the new release? :D

DDOS attack on the site right now, but there is an encrypted "insurance" file with tons of seeders in the torrent community already.

I hope it's aliens/elvis, or even alien elvis.

yeah, lame how all these leaks are about conventional things

where are the reptilians, masons, illuminati, trilateral comission, bilderberg group etc. in all these documents? how come they're never mentioned even briefly? :D

r1ddler might have an answer to that.

shhh don't scare the fish away

wikileaks is a joint venture by all the groups.

Proof:

With all their proclaimed transparency I have never seen a single transcript of a wikileaks executive meeting!!!
If they were legit they'd have a webcam in their conference room or something.

Also Assange = Xenu.

"However, it is worth noting that in yet-to-be-published parts of the cablegate archive there are indeed references to UFOs." -Julian Assange

but that might not be alien UFOs but just regular unidentified flying objects :((((

You got to have faith!

*UPDATE*

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20101128/twl-wikil...f21e0.html

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20101128/twl-wikil...f21e0.html

what do you think?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/29/iran...89018.html

well.. so far for world peace

"hurr, I'm a government lawyer, and I just fucked up really bad."

just what was he supposed to reply really? "yea sure we'll help you filter out the important stuff from our classified documents. if you ever wish to publish any more of our classified shit, we'll be happy to assist you there too."

If he really wanted to protect individuals then yes, that is exactly what he should have done.
He could have easily added that they still regard that entire release as illegal and will hold them accountable.

If wikileaks had then refused to recheck their data based on arguments by the US government, the government would have made a big leap forward in the public opinion.


But being a member of the American government, he obviously thought pulling out the big stick and hoping everyone would just cower in fear would work.

That really backfired.

Oh I don't value your opinion nearly enough to care if you agree with me or not.

I'm convinced that Koh knows full well that he fucked up :)

you do realize that he would get fired had he done what you say? rhetorical question of course.

what a surprise:

an assumption.

from tourist of all people.

an assumption? that a u.s. official would get fired if he breached official u.s. policy? totally unlikely.

I actually have to agree with tourist here, there's no way any U.S. official could have written anything different from that, it's the official policy of the U.S. government. Also, any opening towards Wikileaks, including offering to censor the names, would somehow be seen as condoning the publishing of the documents...

I am not convinced that the official policy of the U.S. is to ignore who you are dealing with and go for the total failure.

They change policies a bit too often for that.

Also, if you apply their own logic to themselves, they are no responsible for endagering the lives of their own people, since they failed to stop the publishing.


As for condoning the publishing, the letter could have contained a statement about legal issues and even a threat. And they could have stalled by saying they will check the documents, and that it will take 6 months to do so.
If wikileaks then goes ahead with the release they look much more reckless.



In any case, I just found the statement from Koh quite funny :)

I meant that it is the official policy of the U.S. government regarding wikileaks and similar portals. It's not like Koh was sitting alone in his office thinking "hmm, what to do with this" :p The U.S. government as a whole is refusing to formally engage in any negociation with wikileaks as long as the site refuses to comply, here Koh is more of a spokesperson for the government than anything else.

Regarding the second part of your post, the moment they give in to some of wikileaks' demands is the moment their position is weakened both internally (see how the opposition is already using the problem against the Obama administration, so imagine if they could accuse Obama of actually working with wikileaks) and externally. A possible way around this would be to engage in negociations with Assange secretly in order to censor sensible information without damaging their image/appearing weak, but this is made impossible precisely because wikileaks is against secrecy and cannot be trusted for secret exchanges.

I don't think that that is the complete truth.

For example "Der Spiegel" which is one of the papers to receive the data from wikileaks ahead of time to sort through it, wrote that they were in contact with the US government about the release because of the security issues that might arise.
They wen to on to state, that the government approached them with several cases where they saw security issues if the information were released. Der Spiegel in turn accepted some of those concerns and made it public that they did so.

So, apparantly it is very possible for the government to discuss certain aspects of the 'illegal' data and also that wikileaks can be trusted enough to not release the data right away in favor of security issues.

/e:
link in google translate, it's about half-way down on the page, fifth paragraph after the "photo course".

I was talking about negociating with wikileaks directly, negociating with "Der Spiegel" and the other four journals is a completely different matter. The example you just gave shows it since the U.S. government precisely discussed with Der Spiegel while at the same time refusing to negociate with wikileaks, for the reasons I gave.
Regarding what you said about wikileaks which could be trusted with security issues, the censorship process that it went through in collaboration with the five journals is not related to whether or not it would make public its exchanges with the U.S. government. The U.S. gov. therefore cannot be sure that any contact it has with wikileaks and Julian Assange will be kept secret (there are no lives involved here), which means that it cannot do what I described at the end of my previous post.

Oh I agree that wikileaks cannot be trusted to keep a conversation secret, but that doesn't change too much.

There is a chance that wikileaks will ignore the safety issues that government has, yes. But there is also that same risk with the papers, they are journalists, after all.
And even if wikileaks publishes the conversations with the US, it won't benefit too much, since
the public see that wikileaks does not stand by its word, which is a very important issue, imo. Also if the government does its job right there won't be much usuable stuff in those conversation, which can contain lots of legal stuff as well.

On the other hand, there is the chance that wikileaks actually does stand by its word, and the government actually does get a chance to protect their people, which is also a US policy that they take very seriously (see international court in Den Haag)

But correct me if I'm wrong, you are of the opinion that protecting American citizens and assets is a policy that is worth less than the the policy on how to treat wikileaks, while it is enough to converse with newspapers.


And I say, that the matter is not clear

and that the statement made me lol. ;)

it was never about "protecting their people". how dense are you?

hush now, can't you see that the grown-ups are talking?

owned

as long as it shuts you up you are very welcome to believe that.

oh hi, calling me a child while believing the u.s. government cares for "their people" is really cute. you probably believe war in iraq was about "weapons of mass destruction".

yeah well, children also like to assume stuff, can't read well and and have difficulties understanding complicated topics. It's not worthwhile to have an educated discussion with them and on top of things they won't even realize that that is the case.

So, yeah it fits you perfectly.


Hint: I never said that the government does care about their people, only that they claim they do and use it as an argument. in fact, I've written quite some stuff about if the government really did care so much about their people they are doing it wrong, i.e. I have discredited their claims / argument.

Naghokez obviously understood that part without me having to write it full detail, you did not and probably still don't, which is why you are not fit for this discussion.

you are what jamerio would've been had he not quit highschool.

:D

Well right now I'm not voicing my opinion on what the U.S. government is doing/should do, I'm merely pointing out the probable motivations behind the answer it gave Assange through Koh :) If they start negociating with wikileaks/Assange it gives him legitimacy as an actor, which is something they do not want him to have. It doesn't go much further than that I think.

see, and I would not call it negotiating. ;)

They could have made a list of documents, which they think are very likely to threaten lives and demand that they are removed and also threaten the wikileaks will be to blame for the consequences if they don't accept that list. After all, they have done something similar with the newspapers.

And if you call that negotiating, then writing the letter we are discussing is too.

"They could have made a list of documents, which they think are very likely to threaten lives and demand that they are removed"

no they couldn't you silly child.

except that they did exactly that in regard to the newspapers.

Maybe you should start reading what is actually going on instead of making a complete fool out of yourself?
Oh wait, neverming, you are tourist, you don't care about facts only about your onw opinion.

And yes, that is why I am comaring you to a child, you don't even realize that you are wrong ...

So really, there is no more sense in replying to you.

the other guy already explained you the difference between wikileaks and other media but you probably didn't catch that in the middle of mashing keys.

http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/

tl;dr :D

Funny how the creater of WL is now accused of rape all of a sudden

How transparant ....

Not really.

People who are raped often keep quiet for many years as they are often kids when it happens.

they forget about it or put it on the burner, then they hear about the person who did it again in the media (as justin has) and have renewed courage as they are older and stronger.

It happens all the time. Just like this.

Its a coincidence, but hardly a full drawn a conslusion and I'm pretty sure there are much better ways to stich someone up if you had those sorts of powers.

Rape requires other parties to testify, they are not going to be able to prosecute the guy without a trial, and that means OTHER people involved, who are either lying or telling the truth.

Maybe you should actually read some articles about the guy before you start to write a wall of bullshit ...

I did.

Which is why I think its possible he could have done it.

Secondly, what bullshit have I written about the guy?

So you're all suspicious about the leaked documents and WikiLeaks motives but you wholeheartedly believe in the most blatant smear campaign ever.

What a freak.

A) I never I said I believed he was guilty. I simply said its possible and pointed out that in the grand scale of probability, its not really a coincidence.

B) If you look at the below post I actually said "for the record I don't belive he raped anyone. I'm just saying its more than possible".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tawnOvY-DcM&feature=related

It's possible this, it`s possible that ... man up and make a real claim, faggot. Oh someone may prove you wrong again and make fun of you, I get it.

You've never proved me wrong about anything and I didn't make a real claim because its not an either or situation.

Keep trying to buy that perception!

Wouldnt the accusation allready be enough to tarnish his name?..

They want him in custody and under their control for the time being, for the record I don't belive he raped anyone. I'm just saying its more than possible.

The rape thing loses credibility because as you rightly said the timing is suspect and you would be surprsied how the law can be twisted and turned with the right people/money/motivation behind it.

How on earth do you know anything about this?

(refering to how people deal with being raped)

dude

Actually, he was originally accused by 2 women a few months ago (during the last release) and then died down. It's coming back again because they need to discredit the information. =P

Ah didnt know about that

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2010/12/02/no-wi...d-of-rape/

I don't get what the obsession with him is.

Its easy to steal info from work (for those that do:P) and upload to the internet.
You don't need wikileaks, Julian or some fancy encrypted drop box to do it.

you could kill the guy tomorrow and its not going to stop people from leaking information, anymore that shutting down pirate bay will stop file sharing.

Like piracy, this is a case of information being virtualised and losing physical format .
All these leaks will do is make GVT's more paranoid and secretive.

look at what happened with torrents, ISPS are clamping down hard. Why becuase file sharing went from underground to mainstream.

What Julian did is make a piratebay out of secret info, but what he did will in fact make GVT's more secretive in the longterm.
had he been more discrete about where and how the info came from (crediting himself) it would probably go on for much much longer.

He wants to be credited with this, so let the GVT go after him if he wants to be some modern day eco net warrior.

Are you seriously trying to argue that there would be less secrecy if they could have more secrecy? Have you considered running for office in the US?

No, I'm simply saying wikileaks is now so hot in such a small period of time they've made it GLOBALLY clear that something major needs to be done at a GVT level to protect info right now.

This can only end in more mistrust and secrecy in the LONG TERM.

Wikileaks tried to make the sharing secret information mainstream.

And the second you do this, you shoot yourself in the foot.

You act like there is trust or transparency already... there isn't. The only difference that this will make is the level of punishment that they are able to use on people who leak it. Hell, our politicians are already trying to label wikileaks as a terrorist organization.

Well they are doing that because terorist powers gave them the right to pretty much do what they want!

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying wikileaks could have served its purpose in a more stealth like way.

If you find a weak spot you milk it, the second you hand out cups to everyone that titty runs dry!

I'm not on the GVT's or Wikileaks side as I make my own conclusions and I understand both JA and GVT's motivations.

No GVT is perfect, what I do know is I would rather USA be the super power of the west than russia or china or some shitty muslim side.

its that simple to me. You have to break eggs to make an omelette or someone else will.

USA is a "super power" in name only.

There is no other purpose of wikileaks than to bring publicity to the matter. Bad press is still press, and wikileaks has completely succeeded in bringing these discussions to every household in America.

I don't see what "motivations" you see for the government, unless you don't know the actual content of this (or other) releases. Additionally, their next leak is specifically documents from a major US bank.

It doesn't matter, whichever way you cut it nothing will change.

The only thing that will change is there will be more mistrust and increased secrecy in the world. Probably towards everyday people.

New protocols will be introduced which will ultimately result in more control by a fewer number of people.

So... if they hadn't done this... would there be more trust and less secrecy? Of course not.

You don't live in America, so you obviously haven't seen the effect that these leaks have had. Anti-government sentiment is higher than I've ever seen it before, even when Bush was in office. The next leak could have enough impact to severely damage our entire economy.

http://radsoft.net/news/20101202,00.shtml Don't know how credible this is of course, but it doesn't seem unlikely.

Thats regarding the rape accusation btw ;)

Site has been taken down

www.wikileaks.ch

also down

http://wikileaks.de http://wikileaks.fi http://wikileaks.nl http://213.251.145.96/

I suppose they just keep deleting them
Tho isnt it a violation of american constitution doing so?

Yes, but you'd have to prove that America did it.

No, it's their hosts pulling them, not the govt:

Earlier, the company providing Wikileaks with its domain name, EveryDNS.net, cut off service because the domain wikileaks.org had become the target of "multiple distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks".

The company said: "These attacks have, and future attacks would, threaten the stability of the EveryDNS.net infrastructure, which enables access to almost 500,000 other websites."

(Source: BBC)

wikileaks deliberately choose hosts which they suspected would be capable of such a move (source: guardian interviews with assange iirc).

refererring to the amazon cloud hosting...

You mean they read the terms and conditions of the hosts, and confirmed that they stated that they must own the copyright to everything distributed (which clearly they don't for all leaked content)?

Seems kinda dumb to me...

it is a strategic move in a popularity contest.

yes, and no: wikileaks own pr machine is on overdrive right now, that is for sure.

they were able to show to the world (through mainstream press) how two of the biggest internet corporations (amazon and ebay/paypal) handle political power; they crumble.
the only bigger player i could think of would have been google but they had their own dabble with politics recently in china.

a similar stance could be taken on the dns server problems wikileaks is facing. did anyone ever see the chance of a mainstream debate about something like this coming? who owns what to what extent? i certainly didn't. :d

i'd even say assange's current whereabouts are part of this too. i mean the uk, really? if he wanted to be on the safe side there are a lot better places to be right now. maybe he/they wanted to make a statement with his arrest?

i'm glad the current interviews with the guardian prove that assange is not a retard. what he said on 9/11 and war in general and his comment on ufo's were a relief to me in a lot of ways.

oh, and did they really release a file to bittorrent with the name "insurance.aes256"? if that isn't poking fun at somebody (or rather something)... :p

Find it hard to believe DDoS still has such potentie :o

I thought QL served as an example @ CeBIT during IEM!

You gotta love wikileaks. I bet some fat asses are sweating like hell because of the leaks. Pure americans losing a war, the financial crisis, the rise of china and the leaks must hurt :D.

There is possiblity that wikileaks is controlled by USA too ;)

so anything of real importance came out of this yet?

we learned that our foreign minister is a douche, whoc doesn't know much about foreign politics.

Oh wait, everyone knew that already.

Virtually everything that wikileaks releases anyone with a clue knows or suspects anyway.

I have not read one thing that's made me go wow.
show me proof of 911 being a conspiracy, then I'll join the eco neo matrix nerds online. Until then, its just ok magazine for politics.

All I read is mistakes in war, diplomats trolling each other behind the scenes, oh please, did anyone really think this didn't go on anyway? Even this bloody website has a top secret admin forum that 99.9% of you read this can't see (OMFG!!!!)

Prince Andrew is inapproriate, you do realise his own country coined the term "Air Miles Andy" for these very reasons but we tolerate him because he's a prince and when dealing with primitive power hungry russians and arabs, its a title they respect cos they see such people as on another level.

The world works on bullshit and DBL standard, always has and always will.

Until wikileaks tells me something new, fresh and exciting Julian Assange can get butt fucked in a cell and live out his little Neo from the Matrix fantasy there.

It's clear that you've been reading the news, and not actually the documents. I think you fail to even understand just how many documents were even leaked. Since I'm sure you won't actually read the documents yourself (as almost nobody seems interested in doing, but love to say that there is nothing in them worth reading), here is a small summary that is being updated constantly: link

Still a load of GVT stuff that you would expect to see and will see (and much worse) in any gvt.

Seeing as you claimed to have read it, why not enlighten us on something of real worth?

How could I have read it all by now? Again, do you not know how many documents there are?

prolly he saves the most important for a later release.. just as a temporary insurance
i hope so.. i wanna see something that'll have some real impact

The extremely damning stuff is in the encrypted insurance file that was already released. If anything happens to him, the key to that file goes out.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/wikileaks

really, you knew all that?

clinton administration actively ordering us officials to spy on the UN leaders? the saudis trying to get the us to nuke iran? berlusconi personally profiting from the energy deals between italy and russia he himself dealt out with putin in person?

Let's break that down..

"Clinton administration actively ordering us officials to spy on the UN leaders?"

Every single GVT does this, inc yours. If they didn't,they might aswell read the newspapers for their info. When running a country you need information BEFORE everyone else knows it.

The saudis trying to get the us to nuke iran?

So?
That whole part of the world is broken when you look at it with western values, there is a difference between trying and asking someone to do something and actually doing it.
Did the US nuke it? no, I already know people from that world are fucking nuts. That's not the US fault and as I said, that part of the world is broken and the west should leave it alone and keep a close eye on the people from that part who try to be a part of the west.

berlusconi personally profiting from the energy deals between italy and russia he himself dealt out with putin in person?

Everyone knows putin and Berlusconi are pigs, especially the Russian. Again, this is how politics works.
Look at Fifia, every GVT tries behind the scenes to do things that benefit them or their country.

How did you think Russia and qatar won the World Cup bids?
becuase they were better than Australia and the UK?

Why do people who have friends in a job stand a better chance of getting the job.

This is how the world works and always has. And the more that's at stake the more deceit that goes on.

tl;dr: you didn't know shit and haven't read the cables yet.

1) the us had their fucking ambassadors collecting dna samples from the un leaders; that's a new low. they used their officials not some undercover spys here.

2) an arab gov actively pursuing a war on iran? no, that's fucking news and none of your racist ramblings will change that.
"western values", "people from that world are fucking nuts": yeah right, that is 100% what this is about, numbskull.

3) everyone knows berlusconi is a pig: true, but we didn't know he pulled shit that huge. people are trying to get him down for years but failed, this could change it. there's no denying that a prime minister of a democratic state can not do something like this.

this is far beyond what he did until now, see: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wik...Berlusconi

hah, another one i'm sure you *anticipated*:

china supporting a unified korea run by seoul, you knew about that? ...really?


edit: even if you don't think it's a big deal, some people do!

Stephens today denounced the extradition warrant as a "political stunt" and said Assange would fight deportation to Sweden on the grounds that it could lead to him being handed over to the US, where senior politicians have called for him to be executed.

The former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has described him as "an anti-American operative with blood on his hands" and called for him to be hunted down like a Taliban leader, while another senior Republican, Mike Huckabee, has said that "anything less than execution is too kind a penalty" for his actions.

source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/05/j...ng-watched

Wow, hypothetical situations of countries the other side of the world based on infromation that is now impossbile to prove because its been in the public domain and could have been edited by numerous 3rd parties. N/Korea is on the tether of starting a war and has been for years. There's lot of thoughts and opinions on places like that. Which means nothing.
If everyone did what they thought it life it would be chaotic.
They don't.

A month or two ago my car was stolen, my DNA is now on the database BECUASE I reported to the car stolen and they did forensics on the car. I can't get it off despite asking.
So for being a victim, I now become a victim of the ultimate invasion. Cool huh.
I have no idea what they want their DNA, but again, you can hardly talk about the morals of stealing DNA when you're seemingly oblivious to the fact that you're reading private, stolen information.

Berlusconi has been a sinking ship for years, ffs the man is 74 years old, how many more years left does he have?

the bottom line is all those things you mentioned have always and always will go on.

Its still a combination of what if and that;s based on the assumtpion I actually belive waht has been written and someone has not edited the stuff.

I think its a far more interesting story that society is seemingly willing to belive anything that comes from wikileaks and now takes it as gospel, which is potentially FAR MORE DANAGEROUS A CONCEPT than anything I read.

When you find something interesting by all means post it.

P.S.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20101205/twl-chine...d0ae9.html

"I bet Russia/China and all the other world leaders are completely innocent behind closed doors aswell when they are not poisoning people, killing reporters and their gvt funded hacking programs! "

quoting you ( http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=2000494#pid2000494 ):

Virtually everything that wikileaks releases anyone with a clue knows or suspects anyway.
I have not read one thing that's made me go wow.
&
Until wikileaks tells me something new, fresh and exciting Julian Assange can get butt fucked in a cell and live out his little Neo from the Matrix fantasy there.
=???
china was and still officially is backing n/korea!

just admit that you're wrong, it's not like you're alone here. at first most journalists either ignored or dismissed the content of the leak.

manning getting arrested and him and assange getting death threats by some of the republicans quite says something.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20101207/tuk-wikil...a1618.html

He's just been arrested in the UK.

HIm and Manning deserve all they get. And Its too ironic for millions of people talking about underhand GVT's when they themselves are reading stolen/hacked information. On top of forgetting that those documents have been passed to 1000's of people and could have been edited at anytime and then re-released for political or religious elevation. Its a really dangerous<<< formula.

Its a recipe which will ruin the world if it went on all the time. Only left wing assholes, or net nerds who have no life anyway and would welcome some kind of global collapse think otherwise.

Its why suicide rates among depressed people go down in times of the recession. They feel better because the world feels bad.

You won't hear me supporting that kind of failed ideology whether there is crap in there or not.

The usa will always be better than ANY OTHER SUPER POWER.

People are too stupid to rule themselves, and believe me, if this was from china, middle east, Russia, you would really have something to complain about and these are the alternatives.

Its easy to slag someone off when its only their shit on the line.
It loses a lot of impact for me when rules have been broken, because breaking those rules would be far worse than anything.

People had their chance to rule themselves, they fucked up time and time again. Everyone has to pick a side at the end of the day.

Until I see such leaks from the other countries then I don't think its fair or acceptable. Its a bad bad formula.

in case noone told you this before:

you are very funny when you think you are right :)

Funny like telling someone they are wrong without actually saying why so you can have all the glory of a successful point without actually saying anything?

Is that the philosophy that led you to having the highest post count on the site. I bet its working well for you IRL!

My opion is closer to being right than wrong. When discussing either or situations its the best you can hope for.

You made a statement without backing it up and so did I in my post.
Also, mine is a lot more closer to being right than yours.


And I didn't even have to use childish insults in a desperate to look credible.
Go ahead, try to classify me a nerd, loser or whatever, I'll just laugh and point at #197 ;)

That's kinda arrogant.

just because the status quo is shit or not, doesn't mean there shouldn't be any resistence to it

resistence brings balance.
balance benefits both smug hippie idealists and self-righteous conservative assholes overall.

Resistence is fine, but not without a solution or you do more harm than good.

Example, a child or animal is being abused. You break into the house, you put the child and animal on the street and walk away.
You solved one problem, but created another one.

What wikileaks are doing is exactly that, its saying look at all these problems, we're gonna dump it out on the net, create a shitstorm and then bury our heads in the sand.

Nothing will change, all it will do is create more mistrust and shitstorms in the world. Ironically it would promote the very thing is aims to abolish.

yeah, we shouldn't go after the people murdering and torturing in this world, what we should do is go after those who "leak" their activities to the public.

so much sense you make...

That's because the stuff JA might well promote that behaviour down the line.

If someone sells drugs that kills someone it doesn't mean they are innocent becuase they did not make and import it.

If I stand up at a concert and shout "bomb" and people run and someone gets killed. Am I innocent?

If someone stopped me from doing that before i could then that would be a good thing yes?

JA is threating that very thing, data is often a valuable commodity, so going after the whistleblower seems logical to me. that is why he keeps saying he's given the info to other people, he's trying to shift the heat from him and transfer it to other non identifiable people.

I have to go now. later perhaps.

please come back soon, I want to read more!

:D

if wikileaks didn't exist manning might aswell have gone to the nyt and guardian himself... whatever, it's useless trying to reason with you.

you could make an argument out of manning signing up for something and then not following what the contract says but i don't care either way: i'm glad he took his lady gaga cd-r's to work :p

lol

He's arrested on a charge of "surprise sex" (unprotected sex, not rape) - an action that carries a $750 fine. No government has brought ANY charges against him for the leaks, as they legally can't.

edit: oh, and he wasn't "arrested" so to speak - he turned himself in.

Apparently, his son was threatened to be killed if he doesn't turn himself in.

Hope he wins in court.

Amen!

source sauce?

The "rape" case was thrown out once, so I doubt anything will happen this time.

I lol'd hard @ Surprise Sex

let's see your cards now Mr. Assange. step your game up!

Indeed.

I gotta laugh at the guy, if you hurt/arrest me my merry band of hacker nerds will tell on you and relase more shit storms.
The guy is a dead man walking. Truth is one thing, fucking over people to get it is and then taunting them is something else.

I mean if that isn't virtual terrorism then I don't know what is.

At this point in time the deluded of the world will say, ahhh but they are arresting him cos they US are going to extradite him.

No no, he very likely conspired with a US GVT employee to steal and release information

That's the source of it, and then the nerds will say, ahhh but he would not have done it if the world was a perfect place and then the GVT will say ahh but if people were not perfect then there would be no GVT's.

Like I said. An unwinnable situation which will only cause a shit storm, which is why my opinion is as it is.

Let's wait, I can almost see the those fruit of the loom "Free Julian Assange tshirts now" and forums filled with petty petitiononline.com links :)

I wonder if the Welsh Spy Gareth WIlliams was involved in this, Manning as also brought up in Wales and was a computer math genius.

I don't know much about manning other than he was of the computer hacker mindset. Small world.

Like I said, more mistrust and more shitstorms, just what the world needs.

Inbetween that, dorks on forums arguing wiht one another.

Cept me cos I'm pointing it out the likely consequences instead of getting directly involved.

gotta go will troll later...

he's a journalists you moron, remember "watergate". rings a bell, right? fucking right-wing nixon-loving numbskull.

you shouldn`t release classified documents... they`re classified for a reason...

do you realize what the word "classified" means? they are hardly "classified" once someone like assange is able to read them.

apart from that they were "classified" by whom under what jurisdiction? i don't think any of this matters in case of assange, he is not part of the us services or even a us citizen.

i scimmed thorugh the wikileaks pages and noticed the documents being marked as either secret or confidential.

those are both classifications. every state has classifications similar to those, be it u.s., e.u., france, poland, germany, uk, sweden

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_infor..._countries

You do realize that this is about a government that will for example read private email even if they are encrypted?
And I haven't got the slightest doubt that the US any government will read the confidential cables of other governments if they can lay their hands on them.


Now people read theirs and they are butthurt.



And here come the fun part: governments like to claim they are "the people" :P

i know, what i'm trying to say is this.... the us services classifiy some of their documents internally as "secret", meaning they should not be released to the unauthorized. the docs hardly are secret anymore once an outsider gets their hands on it and releases them to the public.

at one point the us gov decided to block access to the once "secret" docs for their feds ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/03/w...ss-federal ) because it believes the classification should still be followed internally disregarding the fact that the feds could read the cables at home.

what law do you think i am breaking by viewing the cables?

http://wartard.blogspot.com/2010/11/wikileaks...rican.html

The prince Andrew example is one I used earlier, everyone in the UK knows he's like that, that's why >>>we<<< call him "air miles andy" and he constantly puts up with Sarah Ferguson, becuause he's a disaster just like her. The only difference is, Andrew is a prince and he's useful because primitive, powermongers respect anything to do with power and status.

So we use him for that, that's why he's "Special Representative for International Trade and Investment", which basically means he travels the world in nice hotels, best food, suits and does backroom deals. Just like everyone else then.

The thing is, these cables simply bring a crapload of information to the masses, but the reality is most of the information in the cables is actually known by those who are geographically related to it or have a hardcore interest in the topic. Information which is top secret is usually suspected, like the chinese hacking programs. This was "news" according to the leaks days ago.
Anyone here surprised? No?? Why???
Cos its related to your interest in cimputers/internet, you heard of it before.

Anyone hear of those 7/8 itallian cyclists killed a by a moroccan immigrant who was not supposed to be driving?
Do you actually care enough to tell the world, yet you care about some dumb shit policy that doesn't confirm you or who got the fifa world cup.

Which is why I keep saying, while much of the information is controversial, its only controversial because most of the people moaning about it don't hang around in the social circles where they might actually know or come to this conslusion.
All of a sudden, they find out how the world works and its OMFG!

Its like when you see those videos of how animals are killed, you feel bad for a bit then you're eating meat again. If everyone was shown a video of how their food was killed and served on that plate there would be far more vegetarians.

Most of the people moaning about the Cables and the GVT are just opportunitistic whiners, or left wing internet tits who just want an excuse because its an opportunity to grind whatever axe they have wit the GV/Life.

Tell people information is "forbidden" or "secret" and all of a sudden everyone "cares" what it contains.

Taking on the GVT is like giving up meat, you see the videos of animals suffering (of the cables) you think its bad, it sucks, but the next day, the world carries on doing the same thing and its all forgotten.

This is WHY I think the cables are useless, because all it does it attempt to unsettle something which won't be changed.

The only difference is, GVT's will now become even more secretive, but unlike the common man, they won't forget.
They'll tighten up.

p.s.

I'm happy to change my opinon if something major comes along, but it would have to be on the scale of 911 being an inside job.

Which it wasn't cos america can't even keep a blowjob a secret inside the oval office, but they can plan and rig a building with explsives and nobody suspects anything.

Gimmie a break jerk off's.

k

Good trolling is usually:

Effect > Effort/length

You? Fail

I'm quite a patient man but even I couldn't make it to the end of that. No one would type that much while saying nothing unless they were trolling.

he made 450.000 posts on a gaming forum once. he later pretended that he coded a script for it.

wartard is great

Mastercard's website just got DDoS'ed..lol

Someone left this message on twitter:

@Anon_Operation, who later tweeted: "WE ARE GLAD TO TELL YOU THAT http://www.mastercard.com/ is DOWN AND IT'S CONFIRMED! #ddos #wikileaks Operationayback(is a bitch!) #PAYBACK"

[+] 4chan

Can't do shit except writing catchphrases every day, 4 years in a row.

What is 4Chan anyway? Or what is going on there? Parts of it seem like some radical internet guerilla?!?! Never actually been to the site except the links people post here to some funny threads...

It's basically a bunch of Jamerios or so called 'new fags' sharing sauces for pr0nz.

Basically a forum where the majority are a bunch of idiots who rally around a leader type idiot and DDOS a website for a few minutes, later proclaiming it to be a success and assume Governments and people are afraid of a bunch of 15 year olds with too much time on their hands.

Otherwise it's a pretty funny place at times once you understand all the inside jokes and become desensitized to gore and various pr0n types you never thought existed.

I'm talking of /b/, obviously. The rest of the boards are pretty boring.

Don't know. Makes me think that ESReality is the 4chan of gaming sites...

Visa, Paypal next?

how is the general public in Sweden reacting to this arrest travesty?

Sweden hosts a guy that is accused of human trafficking and sex with minors around here, but i guess he doesn't have a website upsetting the powers that be to arrest him and send him back

I bet most of the citizen there don't even care. They just hear in the news: "... dude got arrested for stealing secret documents, uhhh apparently raping a bunch of women, umm one woman... blah blah" Then everyone's like: "yeah, serves him right."

If you go by the reactions in the comments on sites of our largest newspapers, people in general seem quite outraged.

Because of what? Which side are they are on?

On WikiLeaks and Assange's. "Spineless" and "our government" frequently appears together. Actually haven't read a single positive comment about Marianne Ny.

This Ny seems very conservative to me.

Seems like an attention-seeking cunt to me. :)

Yeah, that's what most conservative in politics do. They shout out loud stupid things to get the dumb majority of their citizen on their side. Reminds me of the EU bitch "Cecilia Malmström"...

german journalist found out, that one of the girls shared her happines about fucking/hanging around with assange 1 day after the claimed rape on twitter/her blog. the data got deleted tho, but the journalist got the cache data.

buuuh USA

loool, no shit? gimme source!

http://info.kopp-verlag.de/hintergruende/geos...er-ei.html


maybe googlate it

Guessing this is more or less the same thing. http://www.samtycke.nu/2010/09/fallet-assange...h-om-igen/

Still not in English though, sorry.

according to this article she even threw a party for him afterwards.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13362...-hunt.html

scheiße man,

didn't know that. Thanks for the info!

Kopp-Verlag may not be the best source for reliable news.

ps. Hi liz!

yo frame ;]

i visit kopp quite often, tho they are a little right wing.
anyways, its hard to find good sceptical german news, so if you got some other good sources id be glad you tell me .

i just hate to scratch along blogs you know ;]

netzpolitik.org does have some unique information occasionally, but it's a Blog as well. What pisses me off, recently, is that some writers there give too much of an opinion regarding those topics.

Apart from that, Markus Beckedahl, the owner, is a really cool guy, as he's in the "Enquete-Kommission Internet" for "Die Grünen" and tries to resolve and enlighten our politicians.

What if she got raped AFTER 2 o clock? :O

http://www.kopp-online.com/hintergruende/geos...r-cia.html

it gets sicker!

she even gave instructions to "destroy people"

lawl

This bitch worked for a CIA sponsored institution, where she works on people to break them?! That shit is twisted!

haha, this is getting REALLY interesting!

they can't even get her name right in the title, why would you consider believing anything else they smear?

Especially considering what else they publish, e.g http://www.kopp-online.com/hintergruende/geos...offen.html

so what is wrong with the title?

and whats wrong with the information you postet for istance?

Her name is Anna not Ana. And they repeat that "little mistake" all throughout the text.

If they really had looked in depth into her life they should have noticed that they are writing a wrong name.

I mean it may be nitpicking, but if you are going to write an article about one specific person, you should be able to get the name right, or else I will just ask myself what else they got wrong.


And honestly, if you can't tell what's wrong with the title of the other "news" I linked, I don't think I can help you ;)

well, writing names wrong is common for avoiding smb. calling you to account. i didnt and still dont accept that source as 100% correct.

enlighten me, the example you postet doesnt show me anything wrong apart from sounding wierd.

give me some substance behind your words, im just curious.

well, writing names wrong is common for avoiding smb.

What the hell? Are they supposed to be a newspaper or not???

enlighten me, the example you postet doesnt show me anything wrong apart from sounding wierd.

For one thing, they write "diabolic secret plan" while the news of the vaccine is actually on the webpage of the Gates foundation and the helmholtz center.

If is very obvious, that that pathetic kopp website just takes a normal news and then spins their conspiracy theory. Hoping for someone gullible enough to believe it and buy their paper for the "eclusive story".

So yeah, believ me, if your are not able to find such "loopholes" yourself then stay the fuck away from such sites, they won't do you any good.

I rummaged thru some other articles and they're really the attention whore here. Exaggerating every fact with adjectives and with every piece of 'news' written, they're stating to be superior to 'regular' newspapers, cause kopp writers 'work freely' and without any boundaries.

I've never heard from them before the wikileaks incident but they seem more like a political yellow press.

okay, i see your more into proving me that kopp is a gay source and i should think about my evaluation of sources/text.

thank you very much.

i agree about their poor stylistic devices you mentioned.

good read:

http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/33/33829/1.html

Why would you have to "believe" anything when you can just read it for yourself?

because even after you read something for yourself at some point you have to decide to either believe the words that are written or not.

Every text has been written by another person who could be wrong or follow some agenda that makes him give a false statement.

After all, paper is patient.

Completely unrelated. Instead of posting about how the article COULD be making mistakes, why not just take 10 seconds to read the actual source? You're acting like the article is your only window to the information.

and you did it again.

What exactly did you wrongly assume the intention of my comment was?

Your intention was to attempt to attack the credibility of the entire article, based on an error with a name.. regardless of the ACTUAL validity of the claims. I know you have issues with reading, but you're getting pretty lazy on your trolling attempts.

wrong.

My intention was to attack the credibility of the author and in extension website.
As lizahd understood, see #275.

Which you don't need to do, since you can freely read the actual article.

You know, I do find it quite funny that you'd discuss reading a German article.

:)

I find it quite funny that you'd discuss reading.

what an amazingly witty comment.

I really do, considering you have at least 3 complete comprehension fails in this thread alone.

Fails based on on your opinion.
Unfortunately, your opinion is worthless.

I mean, think about this: When was the last time someone actually asked you directly for your opinion on this site?

you must get asked for your opinion a lot since your wrote 18000 essays on this site. I guess you and jamerio are two most asked individuals on this site. hey jamerio, what do you think about beck's reading comprehension?

the facts that you asked jamerio to back up your opinion and adopt his argumenting style (post count) say a lot.


After all, there almost always seem to be the same three people that make wrong assumptions about what I write. Vedic, jamerio and you, three of the most respected people on this site.

But of course, I am sure the reason for that only is that I am too stupid and only you three are smart enough to see through it.

lmao :)

the fact that you think my comment was amazingly witty says a lot.

yeah, about your skills in interpreting posts.

"the facts that you asked jamerio to back up your opinion and adopt his argumenting style (post count) say a lot."

just want to throw in, the german koop site is esoteric and is about crazy conspiracys.

disregard the spelling

give me a fucking break

What "fight for truth" is this picture referring to?

http://www.collateralmurder.com/

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07...ntPage=all

just to mention one.

So if I broke into your house and infilitrated your computer and exposed you as somene into some dodgy shit that would change how people think about you in a negative way, would that be ok "cos its the truth"?

Everyone has secrets, be it individuals or gvts.

Most of the enerds sticking up for him are full shit, they harp on about the truth but every single one of them will go through life lying and has lies in their closet.

http://wonkette.com/431902/u-s-state-departme...reedom-day

yeah, that made my day today in the morning.

:D

we should let China hold the Nobel Prize celebration 2011.

... and America the next Football (as in 'Soccer') World Cup!

so far I haven't see them trying to bribe the referee so the rules only apply to the opponent's 20 players, remove the opponents goalie and demand playing with a ball that is only visible to themselves.


But I suppose it is inevitable.

I still owe you a beck's, btw.

hooray \o/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhTfOL9_HBE&am...playnext=1

WikiRebels - Documentary on Wikileaks (4 parts, all in playlist)

thanks!

/e: wow, didn't know the Iceland story
/e2: hahahaha @ "We demand wikileaks to return all versionz of da stolen documents!!111"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/ameri...62639.html

Our government can't get him on anything else, so they're trying to get the guy who actually leaked the documents to take a plea bargain by naming Assange as a co-conspirator.

well, at least the US gevernment seems to have learned thing.
They now fabricate their claims in plain sight intead of doing it secretly.

sadly there are big chances they can get away with it
..and the large majority of the US public will swallow this whole

i guess it's a good step, if it opens more eyes about the state of the world we live in.. maybe we'll get somewhere sometime

In my opinion its not good.

Most of the documents are marked as secret cause of an reason. Also how come they've got all the documents? Doubt they got em all without breaking laws.

They didn't break the law by publishing them - the guy who leaked them did.

Sure, but how come u exactly know who did leak em ALL?

The guy who did it confessed.

And u do believe that one guy got all that info that is up there now? No.

why not?

Cause the info up there includes lots of stuff around the wolrd, one man simply cannot get that much information if he aint president of USA, and most likely still wont be able to do that

how exactly do you know that?

Cause it is impossible.

Why dont u stop being a dick and try to answer me instead?

wrong, close to 2.5 million people had access to the siprnet database (and with it to the leaked cables) actually.
(source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11863618 )

for more info, read this it's very well written and informative:
https://freshhorse.wordpress.com/2010/11/30/w...is-anyway/

in the us most democrats and republicans now share the view that one of the huge security problems is "overclassification" of material just because it seems embarassing for us officials. if you read through the cables you'll get what they mean.

you were not asking a question, you were saying that you don't believe one person could do it alone.
I asked in a normal tone how you arrived at the conclusion. No idea why you would call that "being a dick".

But yeah, I do get the feeling your reasoning is:
I can not be, what should not be.

computers storing a lot of shit and one person dling it. nope, never heard of such a thing.

Julian Assange rejects ‘hi-tech terrorist’ label

Source: http://sendawa.com/general/julian-assange-rej...label.html

Asked whether he thought Assange was a hi-tech terrorist or a whistleblower akin to those who released the Pentagon Papers – a series of top-secret documents revealing US military policy in Vietnam – Mr Biden said: "I would argue that it’s closer to being hi-tech terrorist."

And he said the US Justice Department was mulling how to take legal action against the Australian.

But Assange responded by noting that "terrorism is defined as the use of violence for political purposes". "Biden’s administration continues to take offence at our organisation and the press with a violent or political objective, so who are the terrorists?" he said.

He complained to El Pais that he was "in a condition of high-tech arrest".

"That is I have electronic jewellery which means if I leave the house outside of curfew times then an alarm will go off. It is very Orwellian," he said. Assange said he was also required to report to a police station once a day, which means he cannot stray far from his house.

"That does interfere with my work, it means no secret meetings with government sources or others who may be willing to assist me," he added.

"It means it is much easier to monitor my communication. That is a strong and wrongful impediment to my work."

He is staying at Ellingham Hall, a mansion on a friend’s 600-acre country estate in eastern England, where he must live while on bail, pending ongoing extradition proceedings which may take months.

Media reports suggest that US prosecutors are trying to build a case against him on the grounds that he encouraged a US soldier, Bradley Manning, to steal US cables from a government computer and pass them to WikiLeaks.Assange has denied knowing Manning.

The latest leak suggests how Israel urged U.S. to attack Iran. No shit sherlock!

Wasn't there something similar? Like Afghanistan urged the U.S. to take on Iraq for their nukes?

Wikileaks would have been fantastic if there were to be a major conspiracy, were the 9/11 was planned by the us...hah. but the world isnt that simple...

bs. 911 conspiracy has a way higher clearance level. you may find that sometimes in the memos there's reference to "the thing". by "the thing" they mean "the thing we do not mention over unsecure cables". inform yourself.

"The thing" is more likely to refer to the Fantastic four character than to a 9/11 conspiracy.

don't be naive now. "the thing" can only mean one thing and we both know what that thing is. it's old news brother.

John Carpenter's movie?

your doing it wrong!

An interesting historical example of someone who tried to leak information to oppose their government's policy:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2010/12/wicked_leaks.html

the video was interesting, but the article was SHIT
what nerve to smear so much garbage with a contradicting video alongside?

"Tyler Kent was a horrible man. He was a rabid anti-communist who believed that the Jews had been behind the Russian Revolution." - what's so horrible about this?

"He was convinced that Germany should be allowed to destroy both Communist Russia and the Jews. And America should not get in the way of that being allowed to happen." - he didn't state anything like that.. just because he was against of what he perceived as their interests doesn't mean he wanted them dead/destroyed

"Back in the past Tyler Kent wanted to use secret information to destroy the things that the overwhelming majority of the British people believed in and were prepared to fight for." - he was a US diplomat, who cares about what the British believed? also judging further from the video even the British were not so sure

"Tyler Kent himself is weird and mesmerising. But still unrepentently anti-semitic." - uncalled anti-semitic label.. nothing in the video suggest that

again: if you have different interests/beliefs than jews.. you are anti-semitic?

"Tyler Kent was a horrible man. He was a rabid anti-communist who believed that the Jews had been behind the Russian Revolution." - what's so horrible about this?

he's retard, you're a retard. eod.

i don't agree with him, but i don't understand how being "rabid anti-communist" and believing "the Jews had been behind the Russian Revolution" makes you a horrible person?
also which one of these "character flaws" weighs more?

don't bother to answer tho, you're an idiot who totally missed my point

maybe i missed the point because i believe calling an openly antisemtic person "horrible" is fine. what is your point then?

The world is not easy,wo should think what is ture and what is mistake!

To be not or to be
that the question is

Thanks for bumping, would read again.

So what do you think is the fate of the poster boy of wikileaks whom has just claimed asylum?

I think he should try and stay on the upper platform while keeping an eye on the rear jump pad, but his best bet is quarantine if you ask me.

Haha that's pretty funny :P Although the wooden platforms there would give away his footsteps too easily.