Assange promises 1 million new Wikileaks documents in 2013 - Polidicks

[img]http://imgkk.com/i/yxj3.jpg[/img] [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20806355[/url] [quote=BBC News][B]Wikileaks founder Julian Assange said his work "will not be cowed," as he promised the whistle-blowing site would release a million more documents.[/B] In a speech from a balcony at the Ecuadorean embassy in London, he said the files to be published in 2013 would affect "every country in this world". It is six months since he sought asylum to avoid extradition to Sweden over sexual assault claims, which he denies. He fears being sent to the US and being punished for leaking diplomatic files. A crowd of some 80 supporters gathered outside the building, in Knightsbridge, to listen to the 41-year-old Australian - whose website published a mass of leaked cables embarrassing a number of countries. In his statement, Mr Assange said the US Pentagon had recently described the existence of Wikileaks as an "ongoing crime". Addressing supporters - some of whom carried candles - the Australian said: "While that remains the case and while my government will not defend the journalism and publishing of Wikileaks, I must remain here. "However, the door is open, and the door has always been open, for anyone who wishes to use standard procedures to speak to me or guarantee my safe passage." He also said 2012 had been a "huge year" for the organisation. During the speech, Mr Assange saluted journalists who reported arrests around the world, adding: "It is from the revelation of the truth that all else follows... our civilisation is only as strong as its ideas are true." [B]Round-the-clock guard[/B] Mr Assange delivered a message from a balcony in August, calling for an end to the diplomatic impasse that began when Ecuador's government granted him political asylum. Sweden wants to question him over allegations that he sexually assaulted two female ex-Wikileaks supporters while he was in Stockholm to give a lecture in 2010. Mr Assange entered the embassy after the UK's Supreme Court dismissed his bid to reopen his appeal against extradition. It had given him a two-week grace period before extradition proceedings could start. Mr Assange has been warned he will be arrested when he leaves the embassy for breaking the terms of his bail conditions, and officers from the Metropolitan Police continue to mount a round-the-clock guard on the building. A statement from the Ecuadorian ambassador said: "At a time of year when people come closer together, Ecuador reaffirms the solidarity that our country gave six months ago to a person who was being persecuted for thinking and expressing themselves freely. "Julian has become a guest in this house that we all have learned to appreciate." Calling for reflection, he went on: "Often it is necessary, as we have done in our beloved country, to stand up and face those enemies of democracy that, far from seeking unity and peace among the citizens of the world, instead seek to ruin socialist peoples and dominate on behalf of small groups of people."[/quote]

Heh, that will show them.

I'd have a lot more respect for wikileaks if things weren't run to create as much hype and drama as possible.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;38913993]I'd have a lot more respect for wikileaks if things weren't run to create as much hype and drama as possible.[/QUOTE] How else would he stay alive? The minute Wikileaks drops from the eye of the media, he's dead.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;38913993]I'd have a lot more respect for wikileaks if things weren't run to create as much hype and drama as possible.[/QUOTE] And you know... if the docs they released were not capable of causing innocent people extreme harm like most of them are.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;38913993]I'd have a lot more respect for wikileaks if things weren't run to create as much hype and drama as possible.[/QUOTE] "Wikileaks can report that Robert Sutherland of Boston is...... ... ... [I]Not[/I] a terrorist. Join us again for the next 8 million dramatic reveals"

[QUOTE=draugur;38914020]And you know... if the docs they released were not capable of causing innocent people extreme harm like most of them are.[/QUOTE] Oh come on now. That excuse was pretty weak at the start and still we haven't heard of a single person coming to harm from them. Except Mannings and Assange of course.

[QUOTE=draugur;38914020]And you know... if the docs they released were not capable of causing innocent people extreme harm like most of them are.[/QUOTE] Not a single person has died due to Wikileaks.

[QUOTE=Mike42012;38914018]How else would he stay alive? The minute Wikileaks drops from the eye of the media, he's dead.[/QUOTE] That's not what I said. There are other organizations that have openly criticized wikileaks for running things like a media circus. They use staggered releases and carefully contact news agencies to deliberately stir up as much drama as they possibly can. Who made them the arbiters of justice? To do anything other than leak content significantly weakens their integrity because they allow the mere perception of them allowing bias into their work to exist. EDIT: [url]http://cryptome.org/0002/wikileaks-unlike.htm[/url]

Hope none of these leaks involve military stuff. There is a reason why our stuff is classified, you guys don't need to see our operational plans.

It's not like Wikileak's are releasing nuclear launch codes, they are releasing some damning evidence of war crimes and all sorts of illegal activities being committed by the big players of the world. Who cares right? They don't, because they are not accountable. My favorite recent moment in politics is a speech back in 2008 by President Obama in which he stated he'll be running a "Transparent Government". Julian Assange offers some real transparency of Obama's government and all a sudden he is a man on the run.

[QUOTE=SKEEA;38914176]Hope none of these leaks involve military stuff. There is a reason why our stuff is classified, you guys don't need to see our operational plans.[/QUOTE] Yeah because those helicopter inspection manuals are really hiding something.

[QUOTE=SKEEA;38914176]Hope none of these leaks involve military stuff. There is a reason why our stuff is classified, you guys don't need to see our operational plans.[/QUOTE] I'm actually legitimately curious: have you [I]ever[/I] made a post without mentioning that you're in the military? 'Cause at this point, I think we get it.

[QUOTE=SKEEA;38914176]Hope none of these leaks involve military stuff. There is a reason why our stuff is classified, you guys don't need to see our operational plans.[/QUOTE] when your plans involve the deaths of thousands, they cease to be justifiably private.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;38914106]That's not what I said. There are other organizations that have openly criticized wikileaks for running things like a media circus. They use staggered releases and carefully contact news agencies to deliberately stir up as much drama as they possibly can. Who made them the arbiters of justice? To do anything other than leak content significantly weakens their integrity because they allow the mere perception of them allowing bias into their work to exist. EDIT: [url]http://cryptome.org/0002/wikileaks-unlike.htm[/url][/QUOTE] It's not the way they release content that matters. That is just for their own sake. It's the content itself that matters.

[QUOTE=SKEEA;38914176]Hope none of these leaks involve military stuff. There is a reason why [B]our[/B] stuff is classified,[B] you guys[/B] don't need to see [B]our[/B] operational plans.[/QUOTE] The more you post making sure we know you're in the army, the more I believe you're just sitting all day long on the internet pretending to. Stop please.

[QUOTE=Mike42012;38914018]How else would he stay alive? The minute Wikileaks drops from the eye of the media, he's dead.[/QUOTE] and you'r not joking either you literally mean he is fucked

[QUOTE=SKEEA;38914176]Hope none of these leaks involve military stuff. There is a reason why our stuff is classified, you guys don't need to see our operational plans.[/QUOTE] [I]You[/I] serve [I]us[/I].

[QUOTE=SKEEA;38914176]Hope none of these leaks involve military stuff. There is a reason why our stuff is classified, you guys don't need to see our operational plans.[/QUOTE] You mean like all the war crimes the US has committed over in Afghanistan and Iraq? Like shooting up a van full of children and their father for helping a bunch of obliterated journalists in the middle of the road? Journalists they [u]knowingly[/u] blew to hell. Yeah, we don't need to know about those things, you're right. Because then we'd know what our military is sheepishly doing in the Middle East. We'd know how sick and low war can be and we would never support such endeavors to conquer and exploit foreign countries for our Capitalistic agendas. It's not about exposing plans to win a war, it's about exposing the injustice and evil that has been allowed to fester behind closed doors. [sp]Go Assange, Go.[/sp]

[QUOTE=Mike42012;38914965][I]You[/I] serve [I]us[/I].[/QUOTE] That doesn't mean there aren't times when keeping information on a need-to-know basis is important. Think about what would've happened if the government was completely open about something like say D-Day. A lot of this information is kept classified for a damn good reason.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;38915269]That doesn't mean there aren't times when keeping information on a need-to-know basis is important. Think about what would've happened if the government was completely open about something like say D-Day.[/QUOTE] the war on terror really isnt comparable to ww2

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;38915269]That doesn't mean there aren't times when keeping information on a need-to-know basis is important. Think about what would've happened if the government was completely open about something like say D-Day.[/QUOTE] That's different to knowing that your government has been torturing people in the most horrific ways.

[QUOTE=Bobie;38915293]the war on terror really isnt comparable to ww2[/QUOTE] Alright then, how about the raid on Bin Laden's compound then? Think they'd ever have found him if everyone knew everything about the efforts to find him?

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;38915269]That doesn't mean there aren't times when keeping information on a need-to-know basis is important. Think about what would've happened if the government was completely open about something like say D-Day. A lot of this information is kept classified for a damn good reason.[/QUOTE] Wikileaks has withheld information in the past when it has been sensitive.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;38915327]Alright then, how about the raid on Bin Laden's compound then? Think they'd ever have found him if everyone knew everything about the efforts to find him?[/QUOTE] That's not what people are talking about. Guantanamo has soldiers in it that enforce cruel torture doctrines. I think things would've gone a lot better if people knew more about that.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;38915327]Alright then, how about the raid on Bin Laden's compound then? Think they'd ever have found him if everyone knew everything about the efforts to find him?[/QUOTE] they had every reason to release all information regarding the raid afterwards. though i'm sure if freedom of information did actually exist, there would have never have been a bin laden raid. it would've been pretty pointless.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;38915269]That doesn't mean there aren't times when keeping information on a need-to-know basis is important. Think about what would've happened if the government was completely open about something like say D-Day. A lot of this information is kept classified for a damn good reason.[/QUOTE] What strategic "plans" are being release, where are the nuclear launch codes? [url]http://wikileaks.org/wiki/The_coming_age_of_internet_censorship[/url] It's slowly sneaking up on us, step by step. It won't be quick because change that quick causes a stir, It'll be subtle. To me the early history of the internet everything pre 2006 was a simulation of anarchy and how it can work. The big boys will have their way, the Internet will have as many controls and guards as commercial broadcasting, freedom of the internet will be an illusion in the future. (I'm going off track so I'll just leave a link and leave it at that) [url]http://dollarvigilante.com/blog/2011/6/13/the-internet-is-proof-that-anarchy-works.html[/url]

[QUOTE=draugur;38914020]And you know... if the docs they released were not capable of causing innocent people extreme harm like most of them are.[/QUOTE] Evidence please.

Wikileaks is great, they actually tell us what our politicians actually think instead of regurgitated rhetoric at some podium which turns out to a lot of the time be bullshit. [editline]20th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Jsm;38916112]Evidence please.[/QUOTE] They released uncensored documents on the basis that they couldn't go through them all awhile ago. Alot of uncensored names etc if what people have said is true.

[QUOTE=laserguided;38916345] They released uncensored documents on the basis that they couldn't go through them all awhile ago. Alot of uncensored names etc if what people have said is true.[/QUOTE] Yes but that is not evidence that it has put anyone at harm. As far as I know no one has actually found names in any of the documents.