Weaky-leaks: Furious fans roast Assange in web interview from hell WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was blasted by fans during a live online Q&A – after he, for once in his life, refused to disclose information. The nearly five-year resident of the Ecuadorian embassy in London hopped onto Reddit's Ask Me Anything discussion board where netizens pose questions and the most popular ones rise to …
"Zuckerburg wants your personal info to sell to advertisers"
Yeah, but the Zuck isn't cowering in a broom cupboard in London SW1 praying that if he cosies up to the incoming President Trump he can get the EAW cancelled and resume his lofty position as Upholder of the Free World's Moral Principles.
There was a film with Michael Caine and some magicians, did anyone get this alleged rapist (I believe at least some charges are outstanding) get his mother's maiden name?
Anyway I looked up "rapprochement", it can mean "coming together", assange/ fox news/ republican party all coming together, that's a frightening thought.
So St. Julian never confirms or denies sources after the fact? Uh Huh - about 300,000+ results on Chelsea Manning.
Admitting that the leaks were one sided ? and if I recall there aren't actually any US extradition plans for this publicly seeking jackass, it's all "they could", "they might", he just doesn't want to stand trial in Sweden, will someone just drag this Mofo out.
Thought for the day: Urbandictionary's word for Jan 11th is "Golden Shower" so why isn't the 35 page document with non-verified claims about Donald Trump's proclivities on wikileaks ? So Buzzfeed is now more relevant for leaking documents. Assange should get his coat, since he has committed a criminal offence by not turning up to UK court, can the UK use the "proceeds of crime" bill to recoup it's losses for the first couple of years and that police card.
Fuck it, I started off in such a good mood.
This post has been deleted by its author
And the document is fabricated because Russia and Trump says so? What other truths have we missed from those paragons of virtue?
> There is no way in hell the Russians did not take into account and did not include in their
> assessment the fact that she was paid millions directly (for speeches and attendance)
oh, so only Hillary has conflict of interest, not Trump? especially not with Russia?
http://time.com/4574938/donald-trump-conflicts-of-interest/
start using the same standards for politicians from both sides, will you?
> and indirectly (via donations to her foundation) by people which stands to benefit of a more
> "robust" USA position on Ukraine(*).
says who? random commenter on Facebook or Breitbart?
speaking of donations, I'd suggest you took a look on OpenSecrets at who donates to Republicans
@FourthStooge, calm down. Cheer yourself up with the realisation that Assange now has to live daily with the knowledge that he is but one tweet away from losing the argument that got him asylum status.
As soon as Trump states he's not interested in Assange he will have the label "asylum seeker" peeled off again, exposing the "wanted criminal" tag that has been hiding underneath for almost 5 years now.
Judging by Trumps modus operandi, all it takes is someone praising him for supporting Assange for that to happen. Someone will surely do that, just for a laugh or a dare, so it's only a matter of time.
What about the SMS records?
A) she did not want to charge assange with anything, she just wanted him to take an STD test
B) the police arrested him against her wishes
C) she had actually stated "I was half asleep"
D) the woman who's rape charge was dropped egged the other woman on and convinced her to sell their stories for cash
A) she did not want to charge assange with anything, she just wanted him to take an STD test
B) the police arrested him against her wishes
B relates to A.
A is a reasonable request for people with a normal amount of respect for others, and the fact that she had to involve the police to ask Assange is nobody's fault but Assange's.
B didn't happen because he ran away, but the fact that A was unsuccessful is what triggered the restart of the investigation, and his refusal to have himself tested escalated what was until then pretty much a lover's dispute into a rape allegation, all 100% following Swedish law. No evil conspiracies needed, he did that all by himself, by his own actions. He had *plenty* of time to prevent the escalation - unless there were reasons that made being tested an even bigger risk than running away.
As I have theorised before, the question as well as the fact that he immediately bailed suggests to me that STDs form a part of this story, also because it would explain his attempts to explain it away with this ludicrous story about the US conspiring to extradite him - a story that lacks any 3rd party confirmation or second source, even 5 years later. The latter just doesn't stand up to scrutiny - fleeing to especially the UK would then be a spectacularly dumb thing to do.
So far, the real story has not yet been confirmed. The girls had to keep quiet to protect their legal rights, but were exposed to a hailstorm of Assange supporting f*ckwits accusing them of all sorts of things whereas Assange played innocent whilst the facts appear to suggest he is (again) anything but. I would love it for him to be shipped to Sweden in a crate so it all got resolved. You cannot claim to be for freedom and disclosure and the people if you simultaneously seek to be freed from the same rules, that just makes you a hypocrite.
There was a film with Michael Caine and some magicians, did anyone get this alleged rapist (I believe at least some charges are outstanding) get his mother's maiden name?
Good movie, super surprising ending.
"So Mr. Assange, why aren't you open with your own details? What's your mother's maiden name? What street did you grow up on? What was the name of your first grade teacher and your pet as a child?"
I used to live on Go Fuck Yourself Street in the sleepy hamlet of little bell end, not to be confused with the subject of the article which is of course greater bell end.
Responding to an AMA via video cements his place in history as a pillock who thinks he is above typing on a keyboard and will do anything possible to stroke his now semi ego.
The theory and the ideals that wikileaks should be striving towards are being all but being eroded by this massive cock womble. Can we not just let him go to the Galápagos islands with no internet?
Yeah, I'm not sure I get that.
Internet access too patchy to type answers, so he did a live streamed video instead? Eh?
I'm firmly in the pro-Snowden, pro-Assange camp (check my comment history if you don't believe me) but to some extent, the end always does justify the means, or debase it. Leaking private info for the sake of it seems pointless. Leaking it to hold the rich & powerful to account seems like a great idea.
So, if the end result of leaking a few unimportant emails is that Wikileaks has been played by the Russian government to help get David Brent Donald Trump into power, then they can rot in hell for the damage they have done.
I'm firmly in the pro-Snowden, pro-Assange camp
I don't see it all as simple black and white, there is some nuance to it.
Snowden released information he was entrusted with. That he did so for a good reason to the point that it would stand up in court as whistleblowing is IMHO a decision I can live with, but we must never forget that such a release amounts to a betrayal of trust and usually breaks the law. One of the other arguments to thus defend Snowden is that he has made it clear that (a) the usual checks & balances don't work as alleged and (b) that the whistleblower protection in law needs a heck of a lot more work. So, in general Snowden gets a thumbs up from a democratic point of view - he demonstrated that the absence of enforced transparency creates all sorts of murky problems a government that alleges to be democratic can well do without.
With Assange/Wikileaks it's easy - the whole undisciplined release of anything they can get their hands on and which happens to supports their opinion (or it will be "forgotten" or proclaimed to be of an unreliable source) is in my opinion entirely incompatible with any acceptable standard. Add to that the behaviour of their "leader" and I personally don't care much if they exist of vanish. They is no noble principle behind what they do, it's just data vandalism.
I rather deal with proper investigative journalists who take responsibility for their actions - Assange seemed to think that a Press card was a free get-out-of-jail ticket, so I can imagine he was quite upset when he was denied one in Sweden and the rest, as they say, is history.
Except it wouldn't. His admission that he only took the job to look for shit to leak makes it boring old espionage.
Good point, although I disagree with the label "espionage". Espionage is generally done for (or in the employ of) a single benefactor, not for open disclosure. I agree with you that taking a job with the specific intent to dig for information to disclose weakens the whistleblower argument substantially.
Here's the thing about " Leaking it to hold the rich & powerful [accountable]"; they don't care. Really, just look at Trump. Even ignoring the salacious rumors in the latest leak, during the election campaign it surfaced he once bragged about his ability to get away with sexual assault, and his response what "locker room talk." He had tax returns leaked that showed he claimed a nearly $1 billion loss in a single year, using accounting tricks that screwed his investors (they took the loss) so that he could use it as a tax dodge for 17 years. In general, he used his money and power to say, "Who the fuck cares what I did?" and the people bought it.
Leaks like Assange publish hurt those very people he claims to be helping. The average person gets run over by the bus each time these leaks happen, because they were on the periphery of the bad behavior, but they don't have the resources to make it go away or continue on, or they lose advocates who help them. Can you really name a rich and powerful person actually harmed by Assange or Snowden's leaks? Forcing them from the public sphere is not harm; those jobs were never about the money, it's the access. And when you go back to a private life, those contacts are still there, able to help you out, or your friends. And even if you lost a lucrative job, you still have all the wealth accumulated over the years.
Clinton wasn't harmed; she lost an election but her public profile is not really any worse... she still received more votes than Trump... 48% to 46%, in fact. But she lost razor thin margins in a few states that tipped the election because of the system in place here. And because of that, we now have a situation where a lot of common people will be hurt by a Trump administration, ironically many of his voters. I mean... it's becoming clear that a sizable number of Republican voters think the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is different from the Obamacare they wanted repealed for the last 6 years.... and get really upset when it's pointed out they are the same thing... or persist in saying they are different.
@ Eric Olson
The interesting thing about Republican voters, who put Trump in power, but don't know that repealing Obamacare will leave them without insurance (they're insured through ACA after all - totally different thing) is the reaction of the rest of the world to the harm that these people will suffer.
It goes like this:
Oh well.
The harm Trump will do to the rest of the world, and the 50% of America that resembles a 1st world country, is everyone's concern, and the duty of every sane person to stand up against. But the self-defeating, uneducated, mouth breathing, racist rednecks? Never mind. Let them get their benefits cut, the insurance stopped, and their jobs exported, that's what they've voted for.
"The harm Trump will do to the rest of the world"
etc.
Well, your misconceptions about Trump and his agenda are noted.
My opinion: hang on for the 'E' ticket ride, this is going to be FUN. I expect the UK, Japan, Korea, and other countries whose economies are at least loosely tied to the USA to either indirectly benefit from the ECONOMIC EXPLOSION (not 'implosion', what OBAKA was doing) and rapid growth that will remind everyone of the 1980's (and for the exact same reasons, too), or directly benefit from it.
"A rising tide lifts all boats" essentially.
6 months from now I think you'll see what I mean. But the lamestream media in the USA certainly won't acknowledge that. They'll go out of their way to find someone who was "hurt" by the OBAKA-"care" repeal, and try to make Trump look evil. Meanwhile, more people will have GOOD PAYING jobs, and economic boon in the USA will 'trickle out' to UK, Japan, Korea, Russia, maybe even China. And nobody (but agenda-driven extremists, or perhaps the mis-informed) will want to go back.
As for Assange, I say THANK YOU for releasing "all that". I used to have a low opinion of Wikileaks. Now it's not so bad. Getting the truth out there that NOBODY wants seen has a definite place in our society. And when the US media won't do it, we need something like Wikileaks to do it FOR us.
My opinion: hang on for the 'E' ticket ride, this is going to be FUN. I expect the UK, Japan, Korea, and other countries whose economies are at least loosely tied to the USA to either indirectly benefit from the ECONOMIC EXPLOSION (not 'implosion', what OBAKA was doing) and rapid growth that will remind everyone of the 1980's (and for the exact same reasons, too), or directly benefit from it.
You seem to have regressed to the 60s when everyone was off their heads on drugs, let alone the 80s. Sure, it'll be fun for the people at the top, now they have one of their own in play and can bypass all restraints because they pretty much own all the controls THEY will have a party for sure.
Strange as it appears, I hope you're right, but I fear that reality suggests you're on the wrong end of the scale - I've seen all of that with Tony Blair, and in the US they will do this a lot bigger. I suspect it won't be much fun for the people who will have to live in the ruins they leave behind.
I expect the UK, Japan, Korea, and other countries whose economies are at least loosely tied to the USA to either indirectly benefit from the ECONOMIC EXPLOSION (not 'implosion', what OBAKA was doing) and rapid growth that will remind everyone of the 1980's (and for the exact same reasons, too), or directly benefit from it.
"A rising tide lifts all boats" essentially.
6 months from now I think you'll see what I mean. But the lamestream media in the USA certainly won't acknowledge that. They'll go out of their way to find someone who was "hurt" by the OBAKA-"care" repeal, and try to make Trump look evil. Meanwhile, more people will have GOOD PAYING jobs, and economic boon in the USA will 'trickle out' to UK, Japan, Korea, Russia, maybe even China. And nobody (but agenda-driven extremists, or perhaps the mis-informed) will want to go back.
Well, here we are six months later... how's that ECONOMIC EXPLOSION working out for you?
Responding to an AMA via video cements his place in history as a pillock who thinks he is above typing on a keyboard and will do anything possible to stroke his now semi ego.
Well, 5 years of living alone must have given him some firm calluses - that's probably why he can't type anymore. Or is there an STD that results in atrophy when left untreated? Just curious.
Once upon a time, at the very start of Wikileaks, I thought they did have some benefit to democracy as a whole as the press has not always been that hot to hold those in power to account. However, Assange & friends quickly proved me to be totally wrong on that, and have done their level best never to improve on that low.
In order to defend something you must have some form of respect for it.
Too late. The use of the Internet has become so wide-spread that even people who generally look to escape "reality" for awhile in such a far-flung destination as Galapagos are constantly asking: Do the Galapagos Islands have internet? The simple answer: Yes.
"The most popular questions related to WikiLeaks’ relationship with Russia, why it decided to leak Democratic Party emails when it did"
Because 'Hillary' was Secretary of State at the time and most probably had something to do with getting Assange set-up in that honeypot sting.
Because 'Hillary' was Secretary of State at the time and most probably had something to do with getting Assange set-up in that honeypot sting.
Yeah, sure, a Secretary of State of a major nation who is quite busy with managing things in that nation is going to busy herself with an unwashed gnat of a human being with an ego problem. In the grand scheme of things, Assange is pretty insignificant so he got the ignoring he deserved - to think that someone even considered making him a pet project is severely overestimating his value. EVer heard of critical thinking?
In reality, it is likely that the office cleaner got more attention than Assange, but Assange needs to keep that myth intact for his ego. That doesn't mean you have to buy that story too.
"Yeah, sure, a Secretary of State of a major nation who is quite busy with managing things in that nation is going to busy herself with an unwashed gnat of a human being with an ego problem. "
You are treating her as a normal person rather than the many-headed hydra with tentacles in many pies, manipulating the lives of all the important people all over the world...
Thats why I wear my tinfoil hat. It protects me, even though I am one of the important ones.
Oh no, there is a rip in the tinfoil...
I'm being controlled....
Ahhhhhhh!!!!!!!
"I was insinuating that Putin was doing the double plunge."
And enjoying it. When someone gets as rabid about gays as Putin is while producing their own line in lame homo-erotic soft porn you just know that the banging noise is the closet door vibrating.
As we are all just tubes, if anyone wants to discuss their eating habits and bowel habits, then technically they are being open about being open. I dont see this with Assange, so what we now have is the case of who should we trust?
"Assange believes in full disclosure, whereas Snowden handed over his archive to journalists, who have since not published the vast majority of it."
Yet we also see with Trump & pee-gate, the fact that journalists also report fake biased news, so is Snowden any better or worse than Assange on full disclosure?
When looking at the hierarchical structure of families, society, business, Govt, finance and religion, one thing is for sure, those at the top of the pyramid structure exert the most power and this power can go to their head especially when secrecy is present. Those also at the top have or their relatives have previously exerted excessive mental and physical resources to achieve a situation which allows them to maintain for a variable period of time these lofty positions.
As privacy is a form of secrecy, just like getting spokespeople to reiterate what they have been told as this makes them more convincing liars, if we want to be scientific and logical about this, we should disband all pyramid structures, which means tackling the very laws and current implementation of the financial system that controls the human swarm intelligence today.
If you dont agree with me or simply dont know, then your education has done well to brainwash you into not critically thinking for yourself beyond your current needs as depicted in Maslow's hierarchy of needs which ironically is depicted as a hierarchical pyramid structure of all things, they very thing I'm calling for to be disbanded.
If you get angry with the above written text, then cognitive dissonance is the name given to the emotion & actions generated when holding two competing ideas in your brain, whilst that in itself doesnt factor in the chemicals that you eat, breath, cloth, cover, spray or wash yourself in that also determine your brain & body processes and subsequent actions, which in itself cant be quantified properly due to being more complex and numerous at an atomic scale that any expert in the minutiae of supposed sciences could could possibly calculate and quantify, making them no better than economic forecasters, psychics or water dowsers.
Simply put, if you know any experts who can claim to quantify Brownian motion on a human body sized scale which is, on a global scale, the aptly named Chaos theory or the butterfly effect, without taking into account chemistry and physics concurrently, is just a bullshitter trying to climb the monkey tree using a technique that has been previously agreed by other monkeys with a herd mentality but occasionally can also be novel in its approach if said loner monkey ego often helped along with plenty of testosterone permit them to go to come up with something new, whilst loosely sticking within the boundaries of agreed forms of communication and methods to appear not mad enough to end up in a psychiatric hospital aka a funny farm!
Wikileaks has become an nothing but a tool to gain political power and I really can't take them seriously anymore.I'm sure all the information they put up is very real, but it's been so one sided that I can't help but feel a strong bias on their part. I wonder if they're aware of just how bad their image has become. This AMA is just the icing on the cake really, how can you keep your posture as being a backer of full disclosure of information, all the while withholding vital information yourself?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
