The farcical comedy of "Wikileaks", "Anonymous" etc.

[fbenario]

Nice - by exposing a fake Wikileaks it makes the sheeple believe the original one is actually whistle-blowing. Morons.

Wall Street Journal Launches Phony WikiLeaks Clone

SafeHouse, The Wall Street Journal’s answer to WikiLeaks, did not get off to a good start with the whistle-blowing community.

SafeHouse is supposed to be a place where people can anonymously expose corporate “fraud, abuse and other wrongdoing.” However, after launching SafeHouse this week, the Rupert Murdoch-owned newspaper received a barrage of criticism for putting together a technically-weak website that can expose the identity of individuals submitting sensitive information.

One encryption analyst described SafeHouse as a “total anonymity failure,” while other experts said the website needed “basic improvements” that should have been addressed before launching.

But the major inherent weakness in SafeHouse can be found in the site’s terms and conditions. Under the Limitations section, the Journal says it reserves “the right to disclose any information about you to law enforcement authorities or to a requesting third party, without notice, in order to comply with any applicable laws and/or requests under legal process, to operate our systems properly, to protect the property or rights of Dow Jones or any affiliated companies, and to safeguard the interests of others.”

http://www.allgov.com/Top_Stories/ViewN ... one_110508

[fbenario]

So which was faked - the original news reports, or this Wikileaks crap? Keep in mind Wikileaks is a CIA-front organization.

"Wikileaks: no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square, cables claim "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... claim.html

[nonhocapito]

...and more:
further proof that these "hackers", these leaking websites, the supposed grassroot movement "anonymous", are nothing but agency-run operations with precise political agendas.

Anonymous claims control of Iranian gov’t servers
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/06/03/a ... t-servers/

In a chat with Raw Story, members of Anonymous on the #OpIran server said they were leading the charge because they want Iranians to know they're not alone in their struggle against the regime of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

the oh-so-ironic standard of "Anonymous"

Iran: what a preposterous, weird priority, considering that all these anonymous characters obviously belong to the rich, hegemonic areas of influence that bomb the shit out of other countries. Why not start by taking upon themselves the responsibility of such affiliations? But no: "Anonymous" wants to free Iran, and maybe Lybia, Yemen. How coincidental.

But it is pointless to question what "anonymous" do: what would be the point to criticize and question the unassailable? That's the brilliancy behind this invention, a brilliancy transparent to all the instrumental tools that get sucked into it: The anonymity declared as a statement, as a front cover, cannot ever be about taking responsibility as it is about acting impudently, and never have to account for whose interests you're working for. Anybody can do anything and claim to be "Anonymous": this would be enough to drop this thing here and now -- and yet there are individuals out there convinced that this is all tremendously "cool" and so "against" the power. Sweet dreams...

[nonhocapito]

So which was faked - the original news reports, or this Wikileaks crap? Keep in mind Wikileaks is a CIA-front organization.

"Wikileaks: no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square, cables claim "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... claim.html

Well, maybe it is a favor to the Chinese government in exchange of a truce in cyber attacks. Yet it doesn't even sound so far-fetched. Who knows? Remember the footage of the tanks not running over the protesters?

Also let's not forget that, like the controlled opposition à la Alex Jones has to give good stuff to bait the unconvinced, so wikileaks has to provide legit information and authentic leaks to hook everyone to their channel. Hey, doesn't wikipedia work the same way after all? To slander, censor and rewrite, first you need a credible, appreciated platform.

[Dcopymope]

So which was faked - the original news reports, or this Wikileaks crap? Keep in mind Wikileaks is a CIA-front organization.

"Wikileaks: no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square, cables claim "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... claim.html

Well, maybe it is a favor to the Chinese government in exchange of a truce in cyber attacks. Yet it doesn't even sound so far-fetched. Who knows? Remember the footage of the tanks not running over the protesters?

Also let's not forget that, like the controlled opposition à la Alex Jones has to give good stuff to bait the unconvinced, so wikileaks has to provide legit information and authentic leaks to hook everyone to their channel. Hey, doesn't wikipedia work the same way after all? To slander, censor and rewrite, first you need a credible, appreciated platform.

Counter-intelligence is the name of the game. First you grab your audience by giving them some truth and then you spin it off with absolute rubbish, so that anybody that supports and repeats anything that is said in these "leaks" will be discredited, along with the truth. Gold + Disinformation

[Caz]

With respect to the documents I sent to Wikileaks, they 1) changed the urls
then 2) broke them

Since the ARK annual fundraiser is June 9th (tonight) and headed by Prince William and Kate Middleton, says quite a lot about who wikileaks now operate for. The documents sent to wikileaks were Schillings solicitors letters about ARK (Absolute Return for Kids) and their connection to the Dutroux scandal.

Original documents with urls

Comments re censored video:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Talk:EIMConsu ... ored_video

First solicitors letter:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Schillings_le ... h.Org_over _EIM_Chair_Arpad_Busson

Second solicitors letter:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Schillings_le ... usson,_EIM _Group_and_ARK_Schools_to_911forum.org.uk_hoster,_16_Dec_2008

Response to second solicitors letter here:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Talk:Schillin ... pad_Busson ,_EIM_Group_and_ARK_Schools_to_911forum.org.uk_hoster,_16_Dec_2008

On wikileaks with new urls which rarely open:

Censored Video: http://www.wikileaks.ch/wiki/EIMConsult_censored_video

Discuss of censored video: http://www.wikileaks.ch/wiki/Talk:EIMCo ... ored_video

First solicitors letter:
http://www.wikileaks.ch/wiki/Schillings ... ruth.Org_o ver_EIM_Chair_Arpad_Busson

Discuss of first solicitors letter:
http://www.wikileaks.ch/wiki/Talk:Schil ... to_EUTruth. Org_over_EIM_Chair_Arpad_Busson

Second solicitors letter:
http://www.wikileaks.ch/wiki/Schillings ... d_Busson,_ EIM_Group_and_ARK_Schools_to_911forum.org.uk_hoster,_16_Dec_2008

Response to second solicitors letter here:
http://www.wikileaks.ch/wiki/Talk:Schil ... _Arpad_Bus son,_EIM_Group_and_ARK_Schools_to_911forum.org.uk_hoster,_16_Dec_2008

Info now available here:

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=20528

[Delurium]

just wanted to throw in a small but maybe interesting detail.

When mr Dershowitz had a "lecture" on the University of Bergen (a political speech with a lot of direct lies, i got a private copy of the farce on my phone) he came with an interesting piece of information.

He had been talking about all his friends, Obama, Clintons, facebook dude (i dont respect him enough to even type out his name), all israeli extreme--right wingers (ofc) and that he was going to be the lawyer for mr Assange.

That really made me think; i thought wikileaks was "the shit", but with such a corrupt choice of lawyer makes me think again.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 42,00.html

Especially when he was using this to build up his crediblity in a room filled with mostly "pro-palestinians".

[gwynned]

Can anyone now doubt the complete absurdity of this?

Daniel Domscheit-Berg was the German spokesman for Wikileaks until September.



He was fired by Julian Assange because of a dispute. A story about that which reveals some of the inner workings in Wikileaks is available here:

news.com.au - WikiLeaks leadership in crisis after disputes with founder Julian Assange
(in this article Daniel Domscheit-Berg is represented under his then "undercover" name Daniel Schmitt)
Quote:
Mr Schmitt criticised WikiLeaks' focus on large projects, such as the Afghan war files. He said the organisation was ignoring the importance of smaller national documents and blamed Mr Assange for the problem.

"I tried again and again to push for that, but Julian Assange reacted to any criticism with the allegation that I was disobedient to him and unloyal [sic] to the project," he said.

He added that other WikiLeaks employees were also dissatisfied with the organisation.
The chat log that led Assange to fire Domscheit-Berg has been leaked to (how ironically) and is available at

wired.com - Unpublished Iraq War Logs Trigger Internal WikiLeaks Revolt
Quote:
Domscheit-Berg: i tried to tell you all this, but in all your hybris you dont even care

Domscheit-Berg: so i dont care anymore either

Domscheit-Berg: other than that, i had questions first, and i need answers

Domscheit-Berg: like what agreements we have made

Domscheit-Berg: i need to understand this so we can continue working

Domscheit-Berg: you keep stalling other peoples work

Assange: How many people are represented by these private chats? And what are there positions in the CCC?

Domscheit-Berg: start answering my questions j

Assange: This is not a quid-pro-quo.

Assange: Are you refusing to answer?

Domscheit-Berg: i have already told you again that i dont see why i should answer to you anymore just because you want answers, but on the same hand refuse to answer anything i am asking

Domscheit-Berg: i am not a dog you can contain the way you want to j

Assange: I am investigation a serious security breach. Are you refusing to answer?

Domscheit-Berg: i am investigating a serious breach in trust. are you refusing to answer?

Assange: No you are not. I initiated this conversation. Answer the question please.

Domscheit-Berg: i initiated it

Domscheit-Berg: if you look above

Domscheit-Berg: twice already

Domscheit-Berg: i want to know what the agreements are in respect to iraq

Assange: That is a procedural issue. Don’t play games with me.

Domscheit-Berg: stop shooting at messengers

Assange: I’ve had it.

Domscheit-Berg: likewise, and that doesnt go just for me

Assange: If you do not answer the question, you will be removed.

Domscheit-Berg: you are not anyones king or god

Domscheit-Berg: and you’re not even fulfilling your role as a leader right now

Domscheit-Berg: a leader communicates and cultivates trust in himself

Domscheit-Berg: you are doing the exact opposite

Domscheit-Berg: you behave like some kind of emporer or slave trader

Assange: You are suspended for one month, effective immediately.

Domscheit-Berg: haha

Domscheit-Berg: right

Domscheit-Berg: because of what?

Domscheit-Berg: and who even says that?

Domscheit-Berg: you? another adhoc decision?

Assange: If you wish to appeal, you will be heard on Tuesday.
Now Domscheit-Berg is reported to launch a new website as an alternative to Wikileaks already this December:

spiegel.de - WikiLeaks-Aussteiger baut eigene Seite auf

He claims that the website will be a lot more transparent by solely concentrating on providing the technical infrastructure to securely send secret documents.

I'd like to add that although that sounds good, it's interesting to note that Daniel Domscheit-Berg's wife is the 10 years older Anke Domscheit-Berg who, of all things, works as a Director for Government Relations at Microsoft in Berlin (source).

If that isn't funny enough, Assange has responded, on Twitter, of course:

DDB secretly, and in clear violation of WikiLeaks internal security directives, recorded internal WikiLeaks encrypted "chat" conversations. He initially publicly denied having done so, but attempted to place many of these recordings into his ghostwritten book, most of which were rejected by his publishers' lawyers as violations of german privacy law. Others he secretly conveyed to hostile media, such as Wired magazine, which had been involved in the arrest and persecution of US intelligence analyst Bradley Manning.

His book, "Inside WikiLeaks", contains many proven malicious libels and breaches of WikiLeaks security policies. The book is promoted throughout U.S. military book stores, by the U.S. military.
__________________

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/chdoeo

[pov603]

Don't know how related it is, so, sorry if it goes slightly off-topic, but just saw this link regarding Anonymous.
Seems they may be trying to add 'credence' to this 'organisation' actually existing.
http://tbreak.com/tech/2011/08/anonymou ... s-it-does/

[nonhocapito]

Wikileaks Releases Mysterious Encrypted File
http://gawker.com/5836247/wikileaks-rel ... ypted-file

I wanted to share my sneaking suspicion that if the key to this file will be released (a big if, since these things are not really "for the public", but are the fruits of subterranean battles among agencies, or are simple psy-op games) it might just be about 9/11... for the darn 10th anniversary...

...but it could also be a big file of nothing, posted only to give the impression that wikileaks is still alive and not self-destroyed by the infighting going on among its members...

[LightCone]

Assange appearing in a conference sponsored by the "Open Society Foundation" (SOROS) and various other institutions.

Anti-establishment Assange?

[daozen]

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unG3LACq3F0

Now what an honor!!!!!

[warriorhun]

Dear All,

I just had a brainwave, but I see others posted about Anonymous in this thread, too.

So, try this for size:

ANONYMOUS is the same psywar/disinfo project as WIKILEAKS.
Or, in other words:
Anonymous=Wikileaks=Mossad Lohamah Psichlogit+CIA+MSM.

Well? What's your view on this issue?

(Just in brackets: after 9/11, in the time of the War on Terror, the story of average civilians engaging succesfully in conspiring to commit acts of espionage, and the authorities, who receive billions of state funds and manpower and technology just to make such espionage impossible, not stopping them under 10 minutes is, well, insulting my intelligence...
It seems maybe the perps and their Media dogs felt they have gone too far with this "Neo dishing out justice in the Matrix against lots of Agent Smiths" fairy-tale: I just read some not too old news that 15 or so Anonymous members were supposedly arrested somewhere and FBI declared them being more dangerous than Islamist extremists... Yeah, sure. Is there any adult man on this planet who believes a word of this BS???)

[gwynned]

Dear All,

I just had a brainwave, but I see others posted about Anonymous in this thread, too.

So, try this for size:

ANONYMOUS is the same psywar/disinfo project as WIKILEAKS.
Or, in other words:
Anonymous=Wikileaks=Mossad Lohamah Psichlogit+CIA+MSM.

Well? What's your view on this issue?

(Just in brackets: after 9/11, in the time of the War on Terror, the story of average civilians engaging succesfully in conspiring to commit acts of espionage, and the authorities, who receive billions of state funds and manpower and technology just to make such espionage impossible, not stopping them under 10 minutes is, well, insulting my intelligence...
It seems maybe the perps and their Media dogs felt they have gone too far with this "Neo dishing out justice in the Matrix against lots of Agent Smiths" fairy-tale: I just read some not too old news that 15 or so Anonymous members were supposedly arrested somewhere and FBI declared them being more dangerous than Islamist extremists... Yeah, sure. Is there any adult man on this planet who believes a word of this BS???)

Are adult women more gullible?

Of course Wikileaks and Anonymous are connected. And Anonymous is connected to V for Vendetta which was connected to the Matrix because the mysterious Wachowski Brothers had a part in both. So the question is, "Who is our mysterious Mr. V" because he seems to be the guy behind this all.

[hoi.polloi]

They could be connected, or not. Either way they seem to be playing the same dumb game.