I honestly am starting to wonder if Assange even had anything more. He leveraged that possibility for so long that I think they called his bluff and he had squat.
I know he was involved in some dark online circles, and I wonder if he was just bluffing his leverage. Now he's gone without a trace.
I just straight out disagree with you. He wouldn't bluff on his life and the continuation of his revenge against these guys. He was likely raped as a kid in "The Family" in Australia. He gave a fuck. He had to filter out the stuff people couldn't stomach.
Filter out stuff people couldn't stomach makes no sense and someone exposing the darkest truths of this world would never do that. Why in God's name would he threaten to expose one of the most massive conspiracies in history and then "filter" out and water down the bad stuff to the point that we don't even know what he's exposing? "Filtering out" sounds like a cop out to describe his lack of revelations. Until he fulfills he previous promises, I don't expect more.
I still don't think he had shit. If he did have anything, it wasn't what we think it is. I think he was just bluffing and released everything. He claimed a few times that he would destroy the Clinton's or bring down this or that, but nothing really came of the leaks. Veritas seemed more damning that WikiLeaks.
Now he's gone without a trace, none of his friends will prove his existence, there was no deadman's switch, there was no booby trap to let the world know he's been kidnapped, NOTHING. Just some bullshit that was tweeted out? The whole thing seems HIGHLY suspect and I think some people are too enamored in the idea of Assange and Snowden to admit that he is either a fraudster that was bluffing to help his own legal matters, or he had the worlds worst plan and was squashed by the feds.
Everything people are saying about him is nothing but conjecture. "He wouldn't bluff." You don't know that. "Likely raped." You don't know that. "He gave a fuck." You don't know that. "He filtered it." You REALLY don't know that.
What DO we know? He made big promises and did not come through. He assured us of a plan that has either 1. not been executed, or 2. it sucked. That is all we really know about this.
I have been on this since the beginning. If he is selectively altering the leaks, he cannot be trusted. This entire thing has been about the truth being revealed, no matter how bad it hurts.
If he's taking shit out, he can't be trusted. Period.
I don't think he's taking anything out. I doubt he even has that power. At this point, he's not much more than a figurehead.
What does that have to do with his broken promises and lack of damning revelations?
I honestly don't even see how you think it was his doing. Do we have proof that he hacked these emails? Solid proof that he is the one that got the emails and he is the one that released it? I've seen none.
How is it his? Did he hack the emails? You suggested they're editing information as well. Who is doing that? Who is releasing stuff?
It's all secret to protect people, but it's so secret that we don't know what he has to do with any of this. You cannot prove that he is ANYTHING more than a spokesperson. Do you have any proof that Assange actually released any emails? Proof that he, himself, committed the crime? Proof.
What does that have to do with him promising shit that never happened? What does that have to do with the possibility that he was bluffing and didn't have shit? So far, WE are the ones investigating and exposing this shit. All he did was dump hacked emails that he may or may not have even gotten himself. He may be taking credit for someone else's work for all we know.
What don't you get about that? He didn't release ANYTHING damning or destroying, nor is he even here to explain. That is the fact of the matter. Everything even remotely "damning" about pizzagate has been dug up by forum members, not WikiLeaks.
He has been trapped in that embassy for years and very well could be getting tortured/killed and you are trying to argue about him taking credit for things. What is wrong with you?
Quit with the theatrics you drama queen. I pointed out that he could literally have nothing to do with any of this. He may merely be a face. People praising him as a hero is just stupid. We don't know what the hell he has to do with this, what his motives are, or who he may or may not work for.
That guy is crazy! How can he say he hasn't given us anything? You're right we wouldn't have pizzagate without him! We wouldn't know about the Podesta's pedo terms! Nothing! What? Is he to blame for getting captured or killed before he released them all!
He isn't/wasn't taking credit for anything. He never claimed he stole those emails. He's the middle man in the leaking of information. Hackers and leakers send their data to him, he checks it out to see if it can be confirmed to be the real deal and then publishes.
I think it's odd that you feel this way in light of his internet being cut at the embassy. Feeling so sure of a bluff is about the equivalent of feeling sure he's dead or kidnapped, or rescued. Better to remain neutral, especially with the only things we do know (there were promises, the things that were leaked are significant, fbianon and wiki so far are matching in stride, Assanges net was cut before he could finish his work). We don't know what we don't know.
How is it odd to feel that he was bluffing? That's the most logical answer if you look at the sequence of events.
He's in legal trouble. He threatened to release "damning" info about those investigating him. He disappears and his friends won't verify that he's alive or that he's inside the embassy. He never released any damning info. One can only conclude that he was either lying, or that he was caught and any contingencies have failed, horribly. Considering he is working with "elite 4chan types," the possibility of a deadman failure seems unrealistic.
Remaining neutral means sitting around waiting for an answer. We all know where that's gotten us. I think so many people are enamored by the idea of him that they refuse to acknowledge the fact that he did not produce what he said he would when he said he would. Now that he may be gone, the odds of him making good on his previous promises are very low.
We also know that he has indeed broken promises. We also know that his team is refusing to acknowledge his existence in a manner acceptable to the public.
view the rest of the comments →
WewLaddy ago
I honestly am starting to wonder if Assange even had anything more. He leveraged that possibility for so long that I think they called his bluff and he had squat.
I know he was involved in some dark online circles, and I wonder if he was just bluffing his leverage. Now he's gone without a trace.
THE_LIES_OH_THE_LIES ago
I just straight out disagree with you. He wouldn't bluff on his life and the continuation of his revenge against these guys. He was likely raped as a kid in "The Family" in Australia. He gave a fuck. He had to filter out the stuff people couldn't stomach.
WewLaddy ago
Filter out stuff people couldn't stomach makes no sense and someone exposing the darkest truths of this world would never do that. Why in God's name would he threaten to expose one of the most massive conspiracies in history and then "filter" out and water down the bad stuff to the point that we don't even know what he's exposing? "Filtering out" sounds like a cop out to describe his lack of revelations. Until he fulfills he previous promises, I don't expect more.
I still don't think he had shit. If he did have anything, it wasn't what we think it is. I think he was just bluffing and released everything. He claimed a few times that he would destroy the Clinton's or bring down this or that, but nothing really came of the leaks. Veritas seemed more damning that WikiLeaks.
Now he's gone without a trace, none of his friends will prove his existence, there was no deadman's switch, there was no booby trap to let the world know he's been kidnapped, NOTHING. Just some bullshit that was tweeted out? The whole thing seems HIGHLY suspect and I think some people are too enamored in the idea of Assange and Snowden to admit that he is either a fraudster that was bluffing to help his own legal matters, or he had the worlds worst plan and was squashed by the feds.
Everything people are saying about him is nothing but conjecture. "He wouldn't bluff." You don't know that. "Likely raped." You don't know that. "He gave a fuck." You don't know that. "He filtered it." You REALLY don't know that. What DO we know? He made big promises and did not come through. He assured us of a plan that has either 1. not been executed, or 2. it sucked. That is all we really know about this.
party1981 ago
He might filter it to prevent a world war. Read FBIanon.
WewLaddy ago
I have been on this since the beginning. If he is selectively altering the leaks, he cannot be trusted. This entire thing has been about the truth being revealed, no matter how bad it hurts.
If he's taking shit out, he can't be trusted. Period.
I don't think he's taking anything out. I doubt he even has that power. At this point, he's not much more than a figurehead.
KingKongisCTR ago
You wouldn't be on this site right now if it wasn't for him.....
WewLaddy ago
What does that have to do with his broken promises and lack of damning revelations?
I honestly don't even see how you think it was his doing. Do we have proof that he hacked these emails? Solid proof that he is the one that got the emails and he is the one that released it? I've seen none.
KingKongisCTR ago
Pizzagate is a damning revelation that his platform allowed to come to light. How do you not get that?
WewLaddy ago
How is it his? Did he hack the emails? You suggested they're editing information as well. Who is doing that? Who is releasing stuff?
It's all secret to protect people, but it's so secret that we don't know what he has to do with any of this. You cannot prove that he is ANYTHING more than a spokesperson. Do you have any proof that Assange actually released any emails? Proof that he, himself, committed the crime? Proof.
WewLaddy ago
What does that have to do with him promising shit that never happened? What does that have to do with the possibility that he was bluffing and didn't have shit? So far, WE are the ones investigating and exposing this shit. All he did was dump hacked emails that he may or may not have even gotten himself. He may be taking credit for someone else's work for all we know.
What don't you get about that? He didn't release ANYTHING damning or destroying, nor is he even here to explain. That is the fact of the matter. Everything even remotely "damning" about pizzagate has been dug up by forum members, not WikiLeaks.
KingKongisCTR ago
He has been trapped in that embassy for years and very well could be getting tortured/killed and you are trying to argue about him taking credit for things. What is wrong with you?
WewLaddy ago
Quit with the theatrics you drama queen. I pointed out that he could literally have nothing to do with any of this. He may merely be a face. People praising him as a hero is just stupid. We don't know what the hell he has to do with this, what his motives are, or who he may or may not work for.
Wipe your eyes and move along.
Pizzagatethroaway499 ago
That guy is crazy! How can he say he hasn't given us anything? You're right we wouldn't have pizzagate without him! We wouldn't know about the Podesta's pedo terms! Nothing! What? Is he to blame for getting captured or killed before he released them all!
Fragnostus ago
He isn't/wasn't taking credit for anything. He never claimed he stole those emails. He's the middle man in the leaking of information. Hackers and leakers send their data to him, he checks it out to see if it can be confirmed to be the real deal and then publishes.
Pizzagatethroaway499 ago
Yeah I get that but he had a role in us knowing now.
Fragnostus ago
Sorry my reply was actually directed at @WewLaddy, not sure why I replied to you... ^^
Pizzagatethroaway499 ago
Gotcha!:)
Warnos44 ago
I think it's odd that you feel this way in light of his internet being cut at the embassy. Feeling so sure of a bluff is about the equivalent of feeling sure he's dead or kidnapped, or rescued. Better to remain neutral, especially with the only things we do know (there were promises, the things that were leaked are significant, fbianon and wiki so far are matching in stride, Assanges net was cut before he could finish his work). We don't know what we don't know.
WewLaddy ago
How is it odd to feel that he was bluffing? That's the most logical answer if you look at the sequence of events.
He's in legal trouble. He threatened to release "damning" info about those investigating him. He disappears and his friends won't verify that he's alive or that he's inside the embassy. He never released any damning info. One can only conclude that he was either lying, or that he was caught and any contingencies have failed, horribly. Considering he is working with "elite 4chan types," the possibility of a deadman failure seems unrealistic.
Remaining neutral means sitting around waiting for an answer. We all know where that's gotten us. I think so many people are enamored by the idea of him that they refuse to acknowledge the fact that he did not produce what he said he would when he said he would. Now that he may be gone, the odds of him making good on his previous promises are very low.
THE_LIES_OH_THE_LIES ago
We know that he no longer signs his files. We know that. All the rest is conjecture.
WewLaddy ago
We also know that he has indeed broken promises. We also know that his team is refusing to acknowledge his existence in a manner acceptable to the public.
THE_LIES_OH_THE_LIES ago
His team is likely under a threat of death gag order.