Did Assange cut a deal with the Israelis?

[susano]

Seems likely. Also, what is being released is a batch of files relating to communications between US diplomats and other countries. If Israel actually is, for example, trafficking nuclear materials, why would they be chatting about it with US diplomats?

Agreed. Any official communiques among diplomats is never going to get in to the serious criminal stuff other than war crimes which the main actors don't give a shit about anyway.

 

[ammorris]

It is fine to believe whatever your examination of the evidence leads you to believe. I would only point out that it is wise to critically examine your beliefs occasionally, and remain open to having your mind changed.

 

[steve005]

They could be a pawn for all we know in any doomed-to-fail conspiracy.

yes

 

[nate895]

It is fine to believe whatever your examination of the evidence leads you to believe. I would only point out that it is wise to critically examine your beliefs occasionally, and remain open to having your mind changed.

Especially when it comes to beliefs arrived at by inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is always based on the assumption of "without further evidence." There could always be further evidence uncovered that could radically change our perspective when it comes to these types of issues.

 

[susano]

You should take a look at Russia actually.


Russia Supporting Jihadi Terrorism?
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28495

Exposing Terrorism: Inside the Terror Triangle (The Russian Connection)
Produced: 2009
Exposing Terrorism: Inside the Terror Triangle on Vimeo

JBS CEO Art Thompson reveals there is more to the war on terror than meets the eye. He discusses terrorism, how it has been used in the past, reveals the state sponsors and others in the supporting network and demonstrates how Islam is being used to mask the real culprits. (2009, 17 min., DVD)​

Frank, I do not doubt that the Russians have made useful idiots of Islamic extremists. However, I recall it was Brzezinski who bragged about how he and Carter did so to drag the Russians into a war with Afghanistan.

In the years that I have researched 9/11 I have never run across ANYTHING implicating the Russians.

A thread about Russia, past and present, would be interesting, but this is about WL and the article. I don't know if the article is true. That remains to be seen. I am neutral on Assange.

 

[susano]

It is fine to believe whatever your examination of the evidence leads you to believe. I would only point out that it is wise to critically examine your beliefs occasionally, and remain open to having your mind changed.

I totally agree with you.

 

[susano]

Especially when it comes to beliefs arrived at by inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is always based on the assumption of "without further evidence." There could always be further evidence uncovered that could radically change our perspective when it comes to these types of issues.

Are you talking about Assange or Israel? If it's Israel, their history is well known, as is their treatment of the Palestinians.

 

[nate895]

Are you talking about Assange or Israel? If it's Israel, their history is well known, as is their treatment of the Palestinians.

However, you have no evidence to suggest that Assange made a deal other than prior evidence against the State of Israel. The State of Israel need not be knowingly involved in a global conspiracy in order to do bad deeds. They can do that fine all by themselves, which is all that there is any evidence for.

 

[BlackTerrel]

Wait, you basically just said that because you think that they are involved in heinous things, you are unwilling to consider the possibility that they are not involved in heinous things.

Hmmmm

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=272051

Classic research has suggested that the more people doubt their own beliefs the more, paradoxically, they are inclined to proselytize in favor of them. David Gal and Derek Rucker published a study in Psychological Science in which they presented some research subjects with evidence that undermined their core convictions. The subjects who were forced to confront the counterevidence went on to more forcefully advocate their original beliefs, thus confirming the earlier findings.

 

[susano]

However, you have no evidence to suggest that Assange made a deal other than prior evidence against the State of Israel. The State of Israel need not be knowingly involved in a global conspiracy in order to do bad deeds. They can do that fine all by themselves, which is all that there is any evidence for.

I didn't write the article, I posted it for discussion.

I know NOTHING about Assange, his motives, any deals he may have made, if any, or if he works for the good or the dark side. mm'kay?

 

[YumYum]

I said this on December 7th:

"No, but I find it interesting that in all these documents there is nothing that is scandalous regarding Israel. This looks like a hoax for the purpose of controlling the internet to finally put an end to all and any antisemitism/anti-Israel info on the net in this country, and, if possible Europe. Do you see how cable TV and all the MSM outlets practice a "Zero Tolerance" regarding real/supposed antisemitic comments? The only place antisemitism runs rampant is on the net, and it must be stopped. Lieberman, who is an Orthodox Jew, is the one who is pushing for a new bill for the government to control the net. So far, with all the hysteria, it looks as though this hoax is succeeding. From people I have talked to that are Jewish, they net is their biggest fear. It was mine too, but I think Israel's actions by far is bringing on more antisemitism than anything that is put on the net. I must agree though, the net has tons of web sites with hatred for Jews, and if you were Jewish, you would be very alarmed, if not outright paranoid."

 

[susano]

I said this on December 7th:

"No, but I find it interesting that in all these documents there is nothing that is scandalous regarding Israel. This looks like a hoax for the purpose of controlling the internet to finally put an end to all and any antisemitism/anti-Israel info on the net in this country, and, if possible Europe. Do you see how cable TV and all the MSM outlets practice a "Zero Tolerance" regarding real/supposed antisemitic comments? The only place antisemitism runs rampant is on the net, and it must be stopped. Lieberman, who is an Orthodox Jew, is the one who is pushing for a new bill for the government to control the net. So far, with all the hysteria, it looks as though this hoax is succeeding. From people I have talked to that are Jewish, they net is their biggest fear. It was mine too, but I think Israel's actions by far is bringing on more antisemitism than anything that is put on the net. I must agree though, the net has tons of web sites with hatred for Jews, and if you were Jewish, you would be very alarmed, if not outright paranoid."

The only anti semites are the Israeli goons who terrorize the real semitic people, their Arab neighbors. The vast majority of Jews are not semitic.

The web has been a nightmare for tyrants and politicians, not just the zionazis. There never would have been the shit storm over Obamacare at the town hall meetings without the internet. I think that was a real turning point for the snakes in DC because they actually had some fear when facing their angry constituants. We get NOTHING but propaganda from the MSM and they don't like us being able to communicate outside of their sphere of control.

Assange could be somebody's agent, he could be being used (fed documents) by those who want the web censored, or this could all be unintended consequences. I don't know if we'll ever know.

 

[jtstellar]

WikiLeaks 'struck a deal with Israel' over diplomatic cables leaks

by LikiWeaks
Tuesday Dec 7th, 2010 6:39 PM

We should obviously all support WikiLeaks and its founder and spokesperson, Julian Assange, who has just been arrested in Britain, in this dirty war by states around the globe against transparency and openness. But in the world of politics, sadly, things are never as innocent as they appear. According to new revelations, Assange had allegedly struck a deal with Israel before the recent 'cable gate', which may explain why the leaks “were good for Israel,” as the Israeli prime minister put it.

A number of commentators, particularly in Turkey and Russia, have been wondering why the hundreds of thousands of American classified documents leaked by the website last month did not contain anything that may embarrass the Israeli government, like just about every other state referred to in the documents. The answer appears to be a secret deal struck between the WikiLeaks “heart and soul”, as Assange humbly described himself once [1], with Israeli officials, which ensured that all such documents were 'removed' before the rest were made public.

According to an Arabic investigative journalism website [2], Assange had received money from semi-official Israeli sources and promised them, in a “secret, video-recorded agreement,” not to publish any document that may harm Israeli security or diplomatic interests.

more: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/12/07/18665978.php


No wonder the cables reveal NOTHING of substance about Israel

here's what the article says "Following the leak (and even before), Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a press conference that Israel had “worked in advance” to limit any damage from leaks, adding that “no classified Israeli material was exposed by WikiLeaks.” [6] In an interview with the Time magazine around the same time, Assange praised Netanyahu as a hero of transparency and openness"

here's the actual "source" it linked

JA: Well, I was quoting Netanyahu, who [is] certainly not a naive man. The, of course ...

RS: But the effect, by the way, Mr. Assange, for Netanyahu, is that what he's been saying publicly — i.e., Arab leaders have privately been saying that Iran is the greatest threat, and they want Israel and the U.S. to do something — the revelations have been in his interest.

JA: Of course. We're talking about a sophisticated politician who is of that sentiment he's on the side of, in this issue. But I suggest it is generally — of course, there are exceptions — but generally true, across every issue. We are negotiating ... We need to be able to negotiate with a clear understanding of what the ground is and what our [inaudible] positions are. Of course, one side has a disproportionate amount of knowledge compared to the other side. There cannot be negotiations or proper understanding of the playing field in which these events are to happen.

-----

maybe you're exceptionally literate but i don't see how that translates to "Assange praised Netanyahu as a hero of transparency and openness".

and note i RANDOM SAMPLED the linked sources and this came up as failure on the first try. article debunked by THE SOURCE IT LINKS TO..

can you at least freaking read the articles you link people to before you waste their time? failure of epic proportions