SaltyDroid vs. WikiLeaks

look into my eyes

Julian Assange has RasputinEyes™ :: it’s not a fucking compliment.

Grigori Rasputin is famous for nothing. He was a mystic :: or a healer :: or a prophet :: or a monk :: blah blah bullshit … he was a creepy fucking poser that made everything :: and everyone :: around him worse. The plague of sociopathic narcissists has been percolating for centuries. It’s always in the eyes.

Ms. Assange is the founder of WikiLeaks :: which like Rasputin :: isn’t quite exactly anything. But the magical power of self-proclamation that proved so effective against the Romanovs still works on the web :: and WikiLeaks has mystically become …

… synonymous with free speech.

They are “opening governments” …

… see … they made that picture to prove it.  Science!

According to Princess Ass-ange

“I am the heart and soul of this organization, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organizer, financier, and all the rest …”

And if you don’t like it … you can get the fuck out.

If you’re a nerd {and you probably are} then you’re genetically predisposed toward liking WikiLeaks. Your nerdy little mind is telling you that WikiLeaks is just like Wikipedia … but for leaked documents. Concerned parties can contribute controversial documents anonymously and have them published on the web for all to see. The site agrees to protect the publication :: come hell or oily water :: in a way that lone individuals never could. Maybe throw in a dash of crowd-sourcing for labor intensive tasks like tagging and categorization … and openness may be marginally increased. Openness is good. Truthful information is good.

But your nerdy little mind is wrong :: WikiLeaks is nothing like that. According to their About page

“When information comes in, our journalists analyse the material, verify it and write a news piece about it describing its significance to society. We then publish both the news story and the original material in order to enable readers to analyse the story in the context of the original source material themselves. Our news stories are in the comfortable presentation style of Wikipedia, although the two organisations are not otherwise related. Unlike Wikipedia, random readers can not edit our source documents.”

  • “Random readers” not allowed
  • Collaboration not allowed
  • Editorial judgement exercised about what to print :: when to print it :: and how it is “significant”

That’s not new :: or cool :: or Internet hip … it’s just the same old shit {except worse}.

WikiLeaks is not a neutral conduit finally facilitating the freedom of raw data {which would be very interesting} :: it’s just one of the tens of thousands of outlets editorializing the world through its own skewed perspective {not particularly interesting}. Long term :: it will be exactly as valuable as the organization and people doing the editorializing. Unfortunately :: at the “heart and soul” of WikiLeaks there is a stinking :: rotting :: pale white turd who doesn’t deserve to be listened to … or taken seriously.

Julian’s first “big story” tells the whole tale of the non-value of his editorial voice.  The story is based on forty minutes of leaked footage showing an Apache helicopter killing people in Baghdad.  It’s gruesome … and horrible … and hard to watch. Among the dead are numerous civilians :: and two Reuters reporters … Saeed Chmagh and Namir Noor-Eldeen.

Lots of civilians die in wars. Millions in past wars … hundreds of thousands in the more current varietals. If this is news to you :: then you are a moron. The United States of America fired bombed Dresden and Tokyo into ashes … intentionally killing most of the civilian population. We carpet bombed in Vietnam :: Cambodia :: Laos :: and Korea. Oh … and there was that whole thing with us dropping the atomic bomb … TWICE.

What constitutes “murder” in the context of a war … where massive death is the desired outcome … and the loss of innocent life inevitable?

I don’t fucking know.  That’s the answer.  I don’t know :: and neither does Julian Assange. But that didn’t stop him from calling this video … and its associated website … Collateral Murder.


Fuck you :: you pasty nobody!

As The New Yorker points out …

“In the month before the video was shot, members of the battalion on the ground, from the Sixteenth Infantry Regiment, had suffered more than a hundred and fifty attacks and roadside bombings, nineteen injuries, and four deaths; early that morning, the unit had been attacked by small-arms fire.”

People are trying to kill them. Their friends are dying. Many have suffered intense brain traumas that they’ll never recover from. They are overworked :: and underpaid :: and are separated from their families for fucking years at a time. This war was NOT their idea. If any group of people deserve the benefit of the fucking doubt :: and the absolute guarantee of due process BEFORE judgment :: it’s the dudes we send to die by rockets and bombs so that we can commute sixty miles each day to Stepford Wives Villas where our fat :: spoiled :: children won’t have to brush up against any black people.

That doesn’t mean that there aren’t rules :: or that crimes can’t be committed on the battlefield. But the calling out of an individual soldier must be done with extreme delicacy by those who have been afforded the luxury of not being fucking soldiers.  “Collateral Murder” is appropriately delicate in the same way that Madonna is appropriately chaste.

But some good did come from this tawdry and immature framing of one of society’s most complex issues :: RasputinEyes drew attention to himself :: and raised money for himself. Tweets he

“Raised >$150K in donations since Mon. New funding model for journalism: try doing it for a change.”

What the fuck?  Seriously!  What the fuck?

Hey douche bag :: real journalists fucking DIED in that video footage you just exploited for your own gain! They were walking around the streets of Baghdad in 2007 with their cameras :: along with sketchy characters who were carrying weapons :: and they got gunned down by 30 mm cannon fire {holy shit!}. I’m no journalism expert :: but that seems like pretty heroic levels of “doing it” to me.  Have some fucking respect you ridiculous bastard!!

One thing real journalists are not allowed to do is question WikiLeaks :: or its useless twit/twat of a leader. After The New York Times ran an unflattering story about what a self-absorbed asshole Assange is {paraphrasing} … Julian tweets

“NYT ran a tabloid profile on WL trying to “balance” itself. Case study in bad journalism. Wrong from top to bottom.”

That “tabloid” profile was written by John F. Burns :: who has only won TWO Pulitzers for his brave journalism in shithole situations all across the globe … including Iraq and Afghanistan where Mr. Burns has apparently been wasting his recent years not “doing it”.

When US Defense Secretary Robert Gates was critical of WikiLeaks release of unredacted documents :: possibly exposing intelligence sources to danger :: WikiLeaks squeals

“Gates, who killed thousands in Iraq, Afg and Iran-Contra says we might have ‘blood on our hands’.”

He killed thousands? He was an intelligence officer in the CIA :: the Director of the CIA :: and then the President of Texas A&M University. When did he do all his killing? And a petulant tweet is how you respond to serious criticism from the more than gentlemanly Secretary of Defense?

You think I’m irresponsible? –> Well then you’re a mass murderer!!!

The Apache footage :: the Iraq war documents :: the Afghanistan documents :: and the most recent State Department cables … all seem to have come from one massive leak by US Army intelligence analyst Pfc. Bradley Manning. Assange claims that he didn’t assist or solicit the security breach {which would probably have been a crime} :: he’s just benevolently passing it on in a way that’s sure to change the world into a magical fairy wonderland where the White Witch of Anarchy brings peace to all the peoples … happily ever after amen {vomit!}.

And naturally :: his royal highness doesn’t have time to do any reading or writing about the documents :: what with all his personal appearances :: applause acceptances :: constant begging for them monies :: and Swedish boob rubbings. If you want to learn anything about what’s in these precious documents … you’ll have to read the “tabloid” reporters who don’t believe in “doing it” like the queen does.

So he doesn’t go get the information :: and he doesn’t write about it in any useful way … what the fuck does he do?

Well :: he begs for money … and talks about himself in preposterous terms

“Protect WikiLeaks from assassination or extradition: VOTE for Julian as Time Person of the Year”

The old “Person of the Year” protection that did so much for lucky 1977 winner Anwar Sadat {assassinated in 1981} :: or even luckier 1963 winner Martin Luther King Jr. {assassinated in 1968}.

Vote Julian for Person of the Year :: he emailed some documents {that some other dude emailed him} to The New York Times … oh and also he made a YouTube video.

Winner!! I hope Jules and 1938’s winner :: Hitler :: are very happy together.

“But Droid :: he doesn’t do nothing … he provides a secure/anonymous channel for leakers to submit information” :: says someone who still uses Windows XP.

What the hell are you talking about Windows XP? You’re dumb. Anonymous submission is an already solved problem. People submit all sorts of crazy stuff to The Salty Droid anonymously :: the webz is awesome like that. And while Julian might be good at talking up his mad encryption skillz … it seems maybe he’s not so good about the actual delivery.

According to

“On June 12, Wikileaks’ secure submission page stopped working after the site failed to renew its SSL certificate, a basic web protection that costs less than $30 a year and takes only hours to set up …

A May profile in the New Yorker reported that Wikileaks had been receiving about 30 document submissions a day when it was fully operational. With its Tor Hidden Service down, and now its SSL submission page missing, the average Wikileaks leaker would seem to be blocked.”

I’ll bet my nuts-n-bolts that the 30 leaks per day figure was a lie. The number of brave people in the world who are willing to risk their ass/assets is infinitesimally small :: it’s a miracle that such people exist at all. And if you were going to put your ass on the line … why would you rely on this little dirt bag? His most prominent source is currently facing 52 years in prison according to a report on boingboing that contained this kickass graphic …

WikiLeaks pledged to help Pfc. Manning with his legal costs :: but they still haven’t :: fucking ghetto. Future leakers are advised to send their documents directly to actual journalists … cut out the white monkey brigade middleman.

The same New Yorker article that Wired mentioned also had this interesting tidbit …

“Before launching the site, Assange needed to show potential contributors that it was viable. One of the WikiLeaks activists owned a server that was being used as a node for the Tor network. Millions of secret transmissions passed through it. The activist noticed that hackers from China were using the network to gather foreign governments’ information, and began to record this traffic. Only a small fraction has ever been posted on WikiLeaks, but the initial tranche served as the site’s foundation, and Assange was able to say, “We have received over one million documents from thirteen countries.”

But they “received” it by hacking a hacker? The Tor network is how many people and operations :: including WikiLeaks :: attempt to maintain their privacy. If WikiLeaks pulled one million documents from a Tor stream … then they likely have all sorts of sensitive material that has nothing to do with government imperialism or mass murderings.  Just people’s regular old private stuff. Privacy may be less important than speech :: but it’s still fucking important. It’s still a good :: and a virtue :: and something that we’ve all agreed upon.

But Julian doesn’t believe in other people’s right to privacy :: and naturally :: Wired is crap

“@wired has spoken to no ‘staffers’. No publication dates have slipped. @wired has agenda, doesn’t check facts and is not to be trusted.”

And hows come the Knight Foundation won’t give WikiLeaks one of their $500K grants to support digital age journalism? Could it possibly be because there were other worthy candidates? Nope

“WikiLeaks was highest rated project in the Knight challenge, strongly recommended to the board but gets no funding. Go figure.

Knight grants $2.74Mio to “12 Grantees who will impact future of news” — but not WikiLeaks. Knight really looking for impact?”

Knight Foundation sucks crap! How dare they find impact elsewhere?!? Just another stooge of the mass murderers I suppose.

Oh and by the wayz :: WikiLeaks is DOWN!

He couldn’t even do that one fucking thing. All this bullshit talk ahead of time about rotating mirrors inside unstoppable bunker flux capacitors :: but come crunch time … he’s down like a bitch in the first round. He was dropped from PayPal :: from his DNS server :: and then from Amazon hosting after pressure by the US Government.

So the plan was to piss all over the American government :: insult the egos of most of the world’s other leaders :: and then host all that shit on the servers of one of America’s largest {and awesomest} companies?

Worst :: plan :: ever.

But Julian will have his tweet vengeance

“WikiLeaks servers at Amazon ousted. Free speech the land of the free–fine our $ are now spent to employ people in Europe.

If Amazon are so uncomfortable with the first amendment, they should get out of the business of selling books.”

Oh snap! If Amazon was a nine year old girl she would so be crying right now.

Speaking of nine year old girls … this whole Amazon situation makes the EFF {an advocate for free speech on the web} have a hissy fit

“Suddenly, WikiLeaks has become the Internet’s scapegoat, with a Who’s Who of American and foreign companies choosing to shun the site.

Let’s be clear — in the United States, at least, WikiLeaks has a fundamental right to publish truthful political information. And equally important, Internet users have a fundamental right to read that information and voice their opinions about it. We live in a society that values freedom of expression and shuns censorship. Unfortunately, those values are only as strong as the will to support them — a will that seems to be dwindling now in an alarming way.”

You’re alarmed that Amazon bowed to pressure from The United States of America? was removed from BlueHost after pressure from Chris Zavadowski.



Let’s be clear — the corporate web is ready to banish anyone :: without notice or process :: at the first whiff of trouble. It’s not in their financial interest to host sites that have passionate haters :: and there is no penalty for refusing to host someone’s lawful content. It’s a dreadfully important and serious issue :: because the Internet could enable a revolution of free speech at the fringes.  Speech from the previously unheard :: from the disenfranchised :: from the abused customer :: the recovering cult victim :: or the part-time activist … that’s the shit that matters. Holding up :: and propping up :: uber-poser Julian Assange will only make things worse.

The Government has the right to take an idiotic public stand against WikiLeaks in the same way that WikiLeaks has the right to take an idiotic public stand against the government. There’s no clause in the Constitution that says Senator Lieberman can’t bitch and moan about stuffs. If the government tries to bring criminal charges against Assange for the simple publication of the information :: then a stand for principle in spite of specifics is probably warranted. But if no such actions are taken :: then let Julian Assange drown in the mud hole that he’s dug for himself.

I fanatically support free speech :: I support transparency and openness :: I support punk_fucking_rock Internet awesomeness … but Julian Assange and his RasputinEyes can definitely BiteMe!

>> bleep bloop

196 thoughts on “SaltyDroid vs. WikiLeaks”

  1. Wow, you really put your heart into this one. I’ve read so much pro-wikileaks stuff lately that gave no space for criticism of any kind. Appreciate you opening the door to more critique.


  2. It was at least so smart for mr. Assange to use his Tor Hidden Service since it is such a hard one for hackers to get into and steal data from – although maybe I think my cat did it the other day.

  3. Great post. Could not agree more. Assange is a narcissistic sociopath, not a trailblazer. Furthermore, distributing civilian target lists is in no way “whistleblowing,” it’s just “look at me” wreckless endangerment. And soliciting donations for his alleged source’s defense, and then withholding those donations, shows what a scumbag he is.

    1. @Chip ::

      That money better get transfered … or I swear to jeebus I’ll never shut up about it. Total bullshit that it hasn’t already happened.

      Manning goes to jail :: Julian goes on a peacocking parade.

        1. @AvengingAngel ::

          Pfc. Manning has been in jail for 6 months {for the leak} :: 6 months during which WikiLeaks has spent a massive amount of money … on what we don’t know.

          Julian is in jail on a rape/molestation charge that’s got jackshit to do with free speech :: transparency :: or the public good.

          Don’t want to submit to Swedish sex laws … or think they’re unfair? Then don’t fuck Swedish girls! That’s how it works … and I didn’t even need any secret leaks to figure it out.

          1. @SD, hey
            I think I ve to say I agree with you that rape and or sexual domineering are pretty disgsuring also sexual domination by men is way too prevalent
            And because or despite.. foranyone who read the police report his bevaiour aws obnoxious
            lets not confuse wiki leaks and a rape claim
            The former is good the latter is BAD

  4. You will will have to option to write for a major publication soon.
    I can see that happening shortly.

    They have all the right reasons to have you on board. The question is if Salty is willing to write for the NY times or its competitors and leave Frank kern and the syndicate aside.

        1. @LukeSkywalker ::

          Too bad … cause I was expecting Jacob Marley … and I’d imagine HST’s ghost is even more irresponsible with alcohol tobacco and firearms than was HST … scary!

    1. man, what the fuck salty? why are so many peoples telling you to move on and write bigger and better pieces… about bigger and better consipiracies (not)… for bigger and better publications (as if)… ???

      the comments on your last few posts have been littered with “why aren’t you taking on the big corporations?” and “what about the bankers?” or “you should really target the ?”

      “you should write for the new york times!”

      eff that.

      i hope you never move on. the droid is dug in to this niche like an alabama tick.

      (woah, sound like belcher there… sorry)

      the value you are bringing to the victims of cults, syndicates and confidence scammers should not be taken lightly.

      see, you’re shedding a light on the dark, mushroom growing shitpile of internet scammers and hucksters who go after INDIVIDUALS and take their monies using dubious claims and whatever NLP tricks seems to be working.

      there’s a big difference between vigilante online justice to help people vs. trying to take on large organizations like banks and governments in an attempt to protect the unwashed masses.

      plus, the rewards are much greater – you have a much larger impact by sucking the life out of the internet fuckballs who have made their fortune taking money (or LIFE) from people who could not afford to lose it.

      so keep up the good work, dude.

      -bohica (a paranoid narcissistic conspiracist)

      PS – for those that don’t know, salty’s impact on the syndicate has been huge. you may know that koenigs launched social media marketing machines. i spoke with one of the guys pimping this piece of shit and he’s wondering how he’s made leaderboard with a whopping 3 sales.

      granted it’s 3 sales are at $2997 a pop, which is both shocking and sad. at least koenigs and his crew will have a nice christmas while his customers will have to resort to eating cat food.

      1. @bohica ::

        I wouldn’t worry your pretty little head about me going anywhere. I clearly don’t listen to other people … and I promise that I am the Number 1 fan of this anticult blog. Plus :: why the fuck would I want to go to The New York Times where I couldn’t say “why the fuck” all the time?


        Been watching that Koenigs debacle :: it’s a very strage leaderboard indeed. Tell me who only had three sales … via email if you want. I’m curious.

  5. Another great post Mr. Roboto (Styx rocks).

    But you failed to answer one important question. Bluehost caved on you, but you’re still here. Where do you get your hosting now?

    I’ve sent people to Bluehost and even give them my own money. I don’t want to do that anymore. Your newer, braver host could use some support, no?

    1. @Joe Mudd, Awhile back, I clicked on the URL of a web site that had gotten major exposure on one of the news sites. It buckled under the traffic and wouldn’t load. I looked up the host, and wouldn’t you know…Bluehost. So I went to Bluehost and made a comment on the owner of Bluehost’s blog that this wasn’t a good representation of Bluehost. “Mr. Transparent,” the owner of Bluehost, did not approve the comment. The SAME thing happened to that SAME site, AGAIN, months later…and they still were using Bluehost, amazingly. I would NEVER, EVER, recommend Bluehost!

      1. @Jim,

        The people I’ve sent to Bluehost are local service providers, merchants and even the inventor of an unusual product. Their sites don’t stress a server. So Bluehost is fine.

        That said, I’ve noticed some connection issues of late on my Bluehost sites. They don’t stress the server either.

        So, I don’t recommend them anymore.

    2. @Joe Mudd ::

      The freedom part of the Internet is not as user friendly as the corporate part :: or as fast :: or as reliable. So for regular old boring stuff I’d stick with the unbrave companies.

      I thought BlueHost hosting was solid.

      1. @SD,

        I know you understand this… but the corporate parts of the Internet aren’t obligated to stand up for Wikileaks (which, um, Amazon’s leadership might think is actually doing a Bad thing, not a Good thing anyway). The corporate part of the Internet isn’t obligated to stand up for your rights either.

        Thank God there are people like Project DOD who make it their “business” to give a shit, because there aren’t many businesses that can afford to give a shit. Your $10 a month for Bluehost didn’t buy a whole lot of their attorney’s time (probably 2 minutes… except they bill in bigger increments than that). It’s easy to understand why they caved – “it’s a profit thing.”

        But this Wikileaks thing… it’s not about “open = good” – it’s about an attention-seeking narcissist who doesn’t give a shit about who gets hurt.

        If anyone wonders why Joe Lieberman is especially bothered about diplomatic communications being “made transparent,” consider that secret conversations between Churchill/Cripps and Stalin’s government demonstrated Germany’s duplicity, and made the case for Stalin to prepare to fight the Germans, long before Hitler actually ordered an attack on the Soviet Union in WW2… the Holocaust machine was already firing up.

        But what if some asshole had leaked the cables to and from Cripps, the English ambassador, and published them on some kind of bizarro-world telegraph driven interwebz in 1941? Okay, I’ll answer that for you – the Nazis would have attacked the Soviet Union immediately, and those crucial final few months of mobilization and preparation would have been lost.

        Without secret diplomacy, the Nazis might well have had their “thousand-year Reich” – or something a lot closer to it, than what actually happened. Diplomacy is ugly and messy, but there are good reasons why diplomatic cables are kept secret, and it’s not always about doing evil. That the “diplomatic pouch” contains secrets is understood, and accepted, as part of a very old framework that on balance, prevents wars and other Bad things.

        Many of the diplomatic cables from that time can now be read – the German cables to their ambassador in Moscow, prior to June 1941, all talk about how ridiculous it is, that the Russians could possibly suspect bad intent. The cables from the German ambassador in Moscow all talk about how much the Russians are not interested in fighting with Germany, but they are becoming a little curious about why German planes fly over the border all day long every day. 100% bullshit flowing in both directions, and transparency is only meaningful with the benefit of many years of hindsight.

        But even if people think just leaking everything is a great idea… surely they can see what a complete tool this Assange character is?

        1. @Unicorn Army ::

          Good story.

          And yeah :: it’s scary when you think about companies banning contentious speech as a thoughtless default … but if they actually make a human decision that they don’t want something … then that seems much less onerous. If I was in charge of hosting at Amazon {which would be strange because I’m not qualified} :: there is no fucking way I’d host WikiLeaks.

          If you want companies to stand up for your rights … then buy stock that you only plan to hold short term … cause that’s the only master they serve.

          1. @SD, DMCA is the problem.

            You know, there was a study that came out, showing that 94.3% of all DMCA claims are complete bullshit.

            Okay, actually, that “study” came straight out of my ass, but would it surprise you?

            If you balance the minimal and usually hypothetical “harm” done to a copyright holder when someone puts their stuff on a website, vs. the real harm to free speech that it has caused, not to mention the real cost to any internet service provider who has to comply with it…

            DMCA makes no damned sense at all. If I put a rip of the Avatar movie on my website, it’s probably slower for someone to steal it via my website, than via torrents. The owners of that intellectual property could stop me with DMCA – but they’re not any better off.

        2. @Unicorn Army,

          According to Zhukov, the Field Marshall in charge of the Russian military at the time, the German invasion came as a complete surprise to Stalin. He refused to believe the reality even as it happened. It took Russia a further two years to mechanise their army and mount a defence, by which time the Germans controlled vast swathes of Russia–ever hear of the eastern front? Stalingrad? the two year siege of Leningrad?
          It didn’t hinge on cables, leaked or not–it hinged on the 27 million Russians who died in the defence.

            1. @SD,

              But, being a career soldier and seasoned cavalry campaigner from way back in the Tsar’s army, very little came as a surprise to Zhukov, even Stalin.

              Zhukov had the strategic nous, developed on the battlefield, to not only mobilise an occupied Russia to defence and eventual victory, but also to survive Stalin’s many purges and die a much decorated soldier in his bed, with his much younger second wife.

              It was Zhukov’s canny plan that ensured the taking of Berlin. He didn’t feel the need to be present at the denoument, no narcissist he.

              There’s lessons to be learned from my favourite Field Marshall.

        3. @Unicorn Army,
          Actually you are wrong. If EVERYTHING was out in the open all the time, the Nazis would never have got a chance to begin the holocaust.

          Between having secret stuff done by government or NO secret stuff done by anyone, I will take the second one anytime.
          I don’t mind my hairy ass being on TV, as long as everyone else’s hairy ass is too. Especially anyone running things.

          1. @G.,

            Between having secret stuff done by government or NO secret stuff done by anyone, I will take the second one anytime.
            I don’t mind my hairy ass being on TV, as long as everyone else’s hairy ass is too. Especially anyone running things.

            Sure, works great in theory to have no secrets. Not so much in practice though. Firstly, and mostly, ’cause it’s one of those extremes that is too far outside the human capacity to manage to do. Commanding that there never be no secrets ever-er is akin to saying everyone should be celebrate their whole life or nobody should ever think “bad” thoughts.

            And that comes to it–the reason why there are secrets is because there are some things that you might do or that I might do that we don’t want someone else to know about. And the reason we don’t want them to know is because if they did they might do something to us that we don’t like.

            But, in any case, here is where I can agree: the more power a person or organization has, then the more they should be required to divulge–the more open they should be required to be.

            And the reason for that should be obvious: the more powerful they are, the more likely they are to be involved in something I might consider to be “bad”. And also, the more powerful they are, the more damage their secret acts are likely to do.

            Furry cows moo and decompress.

  6. Well said. The UK’s Guardian newspaper has beyond a joke for the past couple of weeks – regurgitating everything on WikiLeaks with just enough commentary to pass as journalism. Coupled, of course, with much fawning adulation for St. Assange.

    Aside from the fact that he is essentially without substance – his job being only to receive and forward emails – Assange stubbornly refuses to give any thought to whether or not the leaks are ‘in the public interest’. That’s a stiffer test, calling for more nuance and judgement than it seems he’s capable of. The fact is that the public do not need or want to know absolutely everything. Whether or not a diplomat in Paris thinks Sarkozy is an asshole is of no bearing on most people’s lives. The knowledge does nothing to help anybody, or further the aim of free speech. All it can hope to do is piss off quite a few diplomats.

    Obviously, it gets a lot more dangerous than that. One story which the Guardian (thankfully) did not see fit to print was a leak listing hundreds of pipelines, undersea cables, and factories across the world that would cause damage to the US if attacked by terrorists. WikiLeaks (and ‘The Times’) exercised no such discretion, and published the leak anyway. Well done Julian – you’re a hero for ‘freedom-fighters’ everywhere!

    1. @208-577-6210 ::

      Personally :: I’d love if we could just solve one or two or all of the problems that we’re already informed about. Like hey :: what if we didn’t have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the Earth a couple thousand times over? That would be pretty cool.

  7. Great post SD. I have even more respect for you now (aside from your kind help in emails). I thought you would have defended this cretin, but I am glad you took the opposite stance. Very refreshing indeed. I am embarrassed to have to admit this guy comes from the same country as I. Very ashamed. The US military is a force for good in the world despite what its detractors say.

    1. @Chris,

      I think you’re missing the point, Chris.

      “The US military is a force for good in the world despite what it’s detractors say.”

      That’s not the point. That’s really really really not the point.

      1. @WN ::

        It’s not my point … or yours … but @Chris can make points too.

        Although I would be comfortable saying :: The people in the US military hope to be a force for good … and often they are.

        1. @SD,


          I have plenty of friends in the military and out of the military and I feel for them. My dad was a vet as was my grandpa. I know you served in the Forces, too, Salty and I’m not hating on the troops not now or ever.

          But the good intentions of an individual soldier, or a single troop, does not make the strategies and goals of the DOD legit or good.

          “The people in the US military HOPE to be a force for good…and OFTEN they are.”

          Hope is all good, and so is faith, until you find out that what you thought you were fighting for was based on lies.

          OFTEN the US military is a force for good, which means that sometimes it is not. The War on Terror is one of these sometimes where it is definitely not.

          Those are my points.

          I was deliberately being vague with Chris in my first comment b/c I didn’t think that he’d listen to a concrete argument–he’d already made up his mind about “The US military is a force for good in the world.” I retorted his vague comment with a vague comment of my own.

          I realize that you’re trying to stay away from politics on this blog, but I think it’s going to be hard to do in this thread. And we’re going to see the same (boring) Pro and Anti arguments hashed out I’m afraid, i.e., more polarization and ineffective social movements.

          1. @WN, I respect your point of view but I have formed mine as a result of my observations and stances on issues. Things are not always black and white. I never said the US military is perfect, but western militaries have the highest ethics when it comes to conflict. Our army in Australia is deserving of the same compliment despite its tiny number and token role in conflicts. Holding the US military to a higher standard than say a 3rd world army means they are open to more criticism and flaws are highlighted even more. Notice how when the US forces “commit an atrocity” the military investigate? You’d have to admit there is far more scrutiny when it comes to your military’s actions.

            1. @Chris,

              There’s more scrutiny when it comes to US military actions the same way there’s more scrutiny when it comes to Lebron James’ performance on the basketball court. We the biggest, and therefore the most analyzed.

              My main thrust is this: the Founding Fathers intended for The People to be THE PRINCIPAL OPERATING SYSTEM for this Republic.

              Since the year 2000, what we have seen patterned is our democracy undermined (stolen elections, supreme court choosing the President), a false flag operation in the form of 9/11 (no feasible explanation for the implosion of WTC building 7, microscopic explosive materials found in dust at Ground Zero), suspension of civil rights (habeus corpus, Gitmo, TSA growing ever more repressive), two baseless wars in Afghanistan & Iraq (unless you count contracts for Halliburton solid grounds), prisoner abuse at Abu Graib, a non-response to Katrina… and that’s just off the top…

              No amount of damage control or being “open to criticism” or “scrutiny” can forgive these actions that prove that The People are no longer in control or being kept safe with our tax money.

              I’m not a conspiracy theorist, just a concerned citizen who wears his beliefs on his sleeve. I don’t know who’s making these decisions to mold America into an covert-authoritarian police state, but it sure isn’t the American people. Yet how can we not see ourselves as complicit if we allow this pattern to continue?

              Your main point is to say that the US military acts highly ethical in comparison to others, and I agree. But when all US military actions rest on a foundation of myth, then how can we say that they’ve been a force for good in the 21st Century?

  8. 208-577-6210 said, “Assange stubbornly refuses to give any thought to whether or not the leaks are ‘in the public interest’.”

    Exactly. Assange is so indiscriminate as to be the poster boy of wrecklessness.

    Here’s a thought. In 1944, the top secret D-Day invasion was responsible for turning the tide of the war, and ending World War II. Secrecy was essential to its success, and the preservation of both soldiers’ and civilians’ lives.

    Had Assange been around then, along with his “damn the fallout” fanboys, can you imagine what might have happened? Perhaps he would have distributed the dates, times, and landing coordinates, because “the public has a right to know all the details.”

    Personally, I am content to NOT know all the details, realizing that there are some things conducted in my (and our) best interests that are best attended to discretely (and I’m not implying anything heinous, I am referring to negotiations, for example).

  9. Salty,

    I find it strange that you’re willing to base an acceptance of justification on whether or not the United States presses charges.

    Why would you do that?
    why not just make up your own mind?

    at that point we already knew it was coming and did nothing. Life is not a spectator sport, people need to take action if they want to see change– otherwise we end up where we are. Debt crisis, a nation of people in poor health, with crappy health care who eat nothign but crappy foods.
    why? because they are lazy and want better food to be shoved down their throats, that don’t want to work for what’s right, they want to be told what to do and use their credit cards at the mall. Let someone else do it, right?

    isn’t that the reason we’re in this mess.

    I also take issue with your comment “the calling out of an individual soldier must be done with extreme delicacy by those who have been afforded the luxury of not being fucking soldiers.”

    how is that a luxury?
    what does that mean, exactly?
    we have an all volunteer army do we not?
    was there a secret draft that no one heard about?

    my last question:

    why are you so angry?

    1. @Mark Felt ::

      Oops … I think you’re confused. This is Advanced FakeRobot AssKicking 358 … you wanted Remedial Reading Comprehension 095. Go down to the end of the hall and turn left … it’s the second door on your right.

  10. Although Mr. Assange seems to be a grade-a douche, try to imagine what your own country would have been like without leaks. Imagine the USA without mr. Franklin (The Hutchinson Letters) and the constitution. Imagine there being no “Pentagon Papers”-scandal and no Watergate.

    Wikileaks has a purpose and a right to exist, but it’s current form is less than satisfactory. An organization with these goals should never depend on one single individual, whether that individual is a narcissist or not. Mr. Assange needs to step down and realize that, guilty or not, he may be facing jail-time for sexual offences and will most likely not be able to control the operations the way he is used to.

    Wikileaks has the potential, but it must be controlled in a more autonomous fashion.

    I love your work, droid, but can we please get back to bashing scammers and thieves now? When I want political commentary, this is not the place I first think of.

    1. @NotSoHumble ::

      First :: fuck off.

      Second :: (i) Internet (ii) cult-of personality (iii) faker (iv) danger to free speech on the web (v) douche bag

      … that’s more than enough elements to make the cut … he’s in.

      And there’s nothing political about it. Don’t put turds in charge of important things … that’s something we can all get behind.

      1. @SD,

        Let’s see how well Wikileaks and Mr. Assange meets your own criteria:

        >> scamming people who can’t afford to be scammed

        WL: Nope.
        Assange: Unless you count rich people willing to post his bail without hurting financially, nope.

        >> attacking the weak, desperate, or hurting without adequate provocation

        WL: Nope. Unless you count several governments as weak, desperate and hurting.
        Assange: Is still awaiting trial for sexual offences where the victims have stated that they only wanted him to test himself for STDs. None of the victims claims he used force, and none of them can be described as “weak” or “hurting” although getting dirty with Mr. Assange shows they were desperate.

        >> attempting to develop your own nuclear weapons program {I’m talking to you Wayne Jenkins from Kenosha, WI}

        WL: Nope.
        Mr. Assange: Unless he’s Mr. Kim in disguise, I don’t think so.

        >> using sham & spam tactics to build a cult-of-personality :: then cashing in on it like a Pathetic LIFE DRAINING Parasite

        WL: Nope.
        Mr. Assange: well .. I’ve only seen one of his speeches and although boring, I wouldn’t call it sham. Never received any spam from him either.

        I still claim Wikileaks has a purpose. As for Mr. Assange, as I said, he needs to step aside. But attacking Wikileaks, a site whose entire purpose is political, and claiming it’s not political is not honest.

        1. @NotSoHumble, Yo knucklehead, it’s the Droid’s blog, he can post on rainbows and unicorns if he wants. What is it with people like you coming on here and demanding this and that? Are you paying the bills? If you don’t like a post or don’t have anything to add, go somewhere else for a day or two until something comes up you are interested in. Meanwhile, there are those of us who have broader interests which include skulduggery in general, regardless of the type.

          Here’s a little something extra for you:

          1. @Dave,

            I’m not demanding anything, are you on shrooms or something? There’s an open comment-system, which means people are allowed to comment. If SD didn’t want comments they would be turned off. If he was starting a private, secret blog, there’d be passwords. If you don’t want people who sometimes disagree with you reading your shit, don’t post it openly online with comment-functions enabled. Isn’t that somewhat in line with what SD normally says? If you don’t want others listening to your calls, don’t record them and put them online. If you don’t want your secret files leaked, don’t allow people to copy them. If you don’t want comments, turn off the comment-system.

            I’ve been a fan of SD’s forever, and just because I don’t agree with what he claims in this post doesn’t mean anything other than “I don’t agree with some of what you posted here”. I’m not asking that he removes anything or posts a rebuttal, I’m not asking he takes the blog down because I disagree with a few points in a post. I enjoy reading this blog, but I am allowed to have an opinion, and as long the comment-rules aren’t saying “only fanboys allowed” I will sometimes take the time to post whether I agree or not.

            Go stick a broom in an orifice you bearded fanboy.

          2. @Dave,

            and btw., i don’t click cloaked links posted by bearded men online, whether they’re on blogs or midget porn sites.

            1. @NotSoHumble, Sheesh, lighten up Francis (you don’t mind if I call you Francis, do you? Since you are afeared to use your own name?), it was just a nice cup of STFU, don’t get all defensive-like on me.

              Saaaayyyyy, what do you have against beards? Are you saying if I was clean-shaven, you would have clicked on my link?

              I do apologize, as you are right – you didn’t demand, you asked SD nicely to write about what YOU want to see.

            2. @Dave,

              sorry, but all I got from that reply is the fact that you don’t deny posting links on or to midget-porn sites. That’s ok with me, we’re all different. A merry x-mas and fuck off to you to.

          3. @Dave, That’s right, Dave. You go get ’em. This was a brilliant piece — SD’s best ever. But Salty Droid exists as an forum only truly open to people who agree. Kinda’ boring overall but there the facts is.

        2. @NotSoHumble ::

          What kind of long time reader doesn’t trust links from @Dave?

          And hey if you’re bored … why not go back and leave a comment on every post about the death of Colleen Conaway …

          … telling me I should stay focused on important things like Frank Kern.

          I think you’ll find others have already beat you to the punch in that heroic task … but at least you could vote them up and chime in your various agreements.

          1. @SD, @Dave has got General Custer’s finger up his bum and is getting played like a puppet just like you SD and it’s so far up you both talk a load of shit.

            It must hurt when other people are telling you your Daddy’s got his dick up your date.

            Fucking stupid Yanks always in someone else’s back yard and their own is a fucking big mess.

            1. @SD, “marketing” you know about marketing don’t you?

              Marketing = Branding and Selling or in your case riding off brands to help you sell your opinions which are of course always right.

              Didn’t take long to jump the WikiLeaks name to slow the retreating traffic.

          2. @SD,

            I’ve read everything. I read everything. That doesn’t mean I like all regular commenters. As glad as I am commenting is allowed, I don’t feel the need to comment on everything I read. For the most time I agree, I just don’t think WikiLeaks is a worthy target, as opposed to Mr. Ray (who I believe we’re all still agreeing is to be held responsible for what happened to Colleen Conaway) and the other low-life predators.

            I’m not one of mr. Assanges’ fanboys claiming he’s innocent of all charges, but I do think a court is better served to take care of charging it – seeing how the police still has all the evidence and testimonies.

            If you have anything on WikiLeaks and/or Mr. Assange actually commiting fraud, please present that and I will hang my head in shame. I don’t see donating as being frauded.

  11. SD,

    I have been conflicted on this issue. While I don’t like what Wikileaks (sounds like a bad case of VD) did, as far as posting classified information that was stolen from a US Government system, as long as they were not directly responsible for the theft (i.e., they did not induce PFC Manning to steal it) then I think they are legitimate in posting it. However, I do think it is irresponsible to do so, and that their claims for “transparency” are about as weak a rationale as any that can be given. To risk sounding like Jack, Assange takes advantage of the very freedom that he enjoys to post information that compromises that freedom. I would like to see him steal and post shit from North Korea or Iran. He knows his life wouldn’t be worth spit if he did.

    Now, PFC Manning is another story. I know he has not been convicted yet, however, I am pretty sure the verdict will be guilty, and if it is, then he deserves whatever punishment he gets. He willfully violated several articles of the UCMJ, not to mention countless regulations and standing orders on handling classified material to do what he is accused of doing. And for what? A few minutes of fame? Notoriety? Certainly not to do anything good, because all he really accomplished was to set back diplomatic relations with numerous countries, personally embarrass several world leaders and the US, endanger any number of sources, and put a screeching halt to intelligence sharing within the US Government, one of the root causes of our failure to prevent the tragedy that was 11 Sept 2001.

    So, my bottom line:

    Assange – sleazy, conceited sociopath
    Wikileaks – needs a dose of penicillin, otherwise, just another stupid website
    Manning – if guilty, throw the book (or a stack of Lady Gaga CDs) at him
    SD – keep up the hard pipe-hittin’

    1. @Dave, Well said mate. You are right on the money. Freedom is a precarious thing and those who realise it isn’t free and must be defended are destined to lose out in the end.

    2. @Dave,
      If you had access to a wide body of information that indicates that crimes are being committed on large scale against humans, are you
      a) committing treason by exposing it because it potentially compromises diplomatic relations and may incite turmoil
      b) being a patriot because the country deserves to know that crimes are being committed and that they are being lied to

      what’s the humane thing to do?

      would your children, who will be living in the world your generation helped create, respect you for keeping it secret so the public didn’t have to worry about it? Keeping things quiet because it has too many uncomfortable consequences?

      clear cut choice is it?

      I don’t think so. Black and white thinking. Right and wrong. It just doesn’t work that way, black and white thinking is naive. Too many people are so ready to supply judgment because it feels uncomfortable for them to deal with a reality that is even more disturbing.

      1. @Privacy

        I’m sorry, what does “If you had access to a wide body of information that indicates that crimes are being committed on large scale against humans” have to do with anything?

        I haven’t seen or heard about any of the documents Manning allegedly stole documenting “crimes against humans”. There are documents and media that show acts of war, yes. There are documents that disclose what a sordid, backstabbing world the US Department of State deals with that is politic as usual, and that’s all so far. No evidence of massive cover-ups, distortion of casualty figures, undisclosed massacres of civilians, no evidence of “lies”, etc. In fact, almost every review I have seen is “so what, we already knew this”.

        You can’t just proclaim that “crimes have been committed” as an appeal to authority and expect everyone to roll over and concur. What crimes? Don’t start in on an illegal war either, that crap won’t float.

        Did I miss the part where I talk about treason? Oh, I guess not, but your strawman makes up for that. Treason is a tall word. Taller than what PFC Manning did, so I hope that is not what he gets charged with.

        Thanks for the lecture on black and white thinking, that’s really helpful.

        1. @Dave,
          Have you read the cables or are you one of those that are regurgitating other people’s statements. Sure, all those leaks are so trivial – and besides we knew everything about them already right?
          distortion of casualty figures?

          civilian massacres?

          no massive coverups?

          etc etc etc

          I guess that’s not news worthy. Maybe it’s not massive enough, I mean what it is. Sure we cry foul when an IM’ers collude to squeeze out 1997$ product sales out of a naive market and devote our critical attention there, but this other stuff is just trivial…I guess. War acts…I guess,
          Hey since we’ve already established a reasonable perception that all these guru’s are conning money out of people, why even bother blogging about it anymore? I mean, ‘it’s marketing acts’, that’s what a capitalist market is all about right. Yeah Dave, very convincing.

          1. @Privacy is a right to be fought for ::

            Of course 250,000 cables are going to show :: figure distortion :: massacres :: cover-ups :: etc. That’s what happens … that’s what’s happening. And I’ve learned a few interesting things I didn’t know via real reporters writing about the data like the stuff you linked to. Governments suck hardcore and they need people {qualified people!} watching over them like hawks.

            My argument is about the who {Julian} :: and the how {with great narcissism and irresponsibility} :: not about the data itself … or about what true data freedom might mean for society.

            1. @SD,
              While I agree julian is a grade A douche…it’s still probably better to expose governments (yes, all of them in general) for their own douchery, which generally tends to be fatal on a massive scale, unlike Julian’s douchery, which (on a personal level is “merely” rape) and on a non-personal level is a few thousands.
              It all sucks sweaty balls, but for me it’s about the number of dead/evils done.

              1. @G. ::


                Exposing governments :: and transparency more generally … is the MOST important thing. Which is why this albino dingleberry doesn’t get to carry the flag. We can’t allow The Man to associate transparency with anarchy … we can’t surrender the moral high ground … we can’t carry out acts of informational violence {hacking and stealing} … we have to be better than them. At least that’s my opinion :: because I want to win … and not just talk.

                And the whole idea of this sort of “auto transparency via tor” was a unicorn. Gathering and disseminating secret information is hard and demanding work … it can’t be put on InternetAutoPilot … and the resumes of freedom’s editorial staff cannot be ignored. Cause there are plenty of legit resumes ready to die carrying this particular fucking flag.

                Leadership matters.

            2. @G,

              Here’s some previously secret data about to be revealed, courtesy of Judge Lind:


              “Judge Denise Lind ruled that prosecutors would have to turn over reports from the CIA, the FBI, the State Department and the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive that assessed the impact of the leaks.”

              Discovery, put to its proper legal use.

              And so far the grade A douche has not been arrested, or as yet even questioned about the alleged ‘rape’, despite giving his inquisitors ample opportunity to do so, in the relative safety of the UK.

              I wouldn’t fancy being introduced to the wonders of extraordinary rendition by those laid back, liberty loving Swedes, either.

            3. @SD,

              we can’t carry out acts of informational violence {hacking and stealing} … we have to be better than them. At least that’s my opinion :: because I want to win … and not just talk.

              I agree. Partly because I want to win too. But mostly because you said so, and I think this is an area where you should get to consider yourself a bit of an authority.

              Anticipating the objection that some might raise: Isn’t it bad to just trust some authority? Aren’t we supposd to all be thinking for ourselves, etc?

              (quoting you again)

              And the whole idea of this sort of “auto transparency via tor” was a unicorn. Gathering and disseminating secret information is hard and demanding work … it can’t be put on InternetAutoPilot …

              I’ve noticed. I remember back-in-the-day whenever it was when I would watch/read random stories (mostly by Gibson, whose stories I don’t happen to like) where the brave, intrepid info-pirate/hacker would courageously steal data from where-ever and open it up to the masses.

              Well, that plan is looking pretty stupid right about now; just like Robin Hood Men In Tights.

              Aquiring data is hard. Aquiring large amounts of data that is considered to be other peoples’ private property is hard and extremely risky, if you’re looking to stay out of prision. (I am.)

              Anyway, since it is so hard, if somone goes to that much trouble to “liberate” private data, then it’s likely they’re being paid to do it by some other person or group that isn’t interested in releasing that data to the public and

              even if someone does release vast piles of data to the public (like wikileaks), we are then hit with the problem that piles of data is not even close to the same as cogent information.

              So the time intensive job of research and reporting on the results, and thereby becoming an authority on some subject is still very much in demand.

              It’s just a pity it’s so hard to turn it into a paying gig. The problem is, is the moment money enters into it, the more whoever is paying will want to have a say in what is covered and in what is not covered.

              On the related classic hacker subject “Information Wants To Be Free” there’s a dino scientist (not P.Z. Meyers) here that has some good and some bad to say about the openness, or lack of, of government funded research:

              He and someone else are starting a new site to get the word out about the problem

              Furry cows moo and decompress.

            4. @Wyrd,

              (brief follow-up)
              An example of what can happen if someone decides to just break all those happy-fun rules and “liberate” the data for the good of all totally disrespecting any kind of due process or copyright law:
              From TFA

              Swartz entered the networking closet for the last time in January. The complaint describes the scene: “As Swartz entered the wiring closet, he held his bicycle helmet like a mask to shield his face, looking through ventilation holes in the helmet. Swartz then removed his computer equipment from the closet, put it in his backpack, and left, again masking his face with the bicycle helmet before peering through a crack in the double doors and cautiously stepping out.”

              The complaint alleges that “Swartz intended to distribute a significant portion of JSTOR’s archive of digitized journal articles through one or more file-sharing sites.” But it offers no evidence for this claim. In fact, in a statement following the arrest, JSTOR acknowledged that “we secured from Mr. Swartz the content that was taken, and received confirmation that the content was not and would not be used, copied, transferred, or distributed.”

              . . .

              There’s an important difference between PACER and JSTOR. As works of the federal government, PACER documents are in the public domain. In contrast, many JSTOR documents are protected by copyright. The PACER documents Swartz downloaded are now available for download. Distributing the JSTOR documents, in contrast, would be a clear case of copyright infringement.
              . . .

              Furry cows moo and decompress.

    3. Amen to @Dave’s “bottom line” summary. Though I too have been conflicted about some of this, one point that has become abundantly clear to me is that Assange is a narcissist and sociopath who doesn’t have any sort of “greater good” in mind.

      @SD, it’s interesting that some people are looking upon this post as evidence that you should abandon your usual Syndicate-oriented subject matter and turn to “larger” issues, while some protest that you should forget these “larger” issues and go back to beating up on the Syndicate. What these folks don’t seem to get (besides the basic fact that it’s your blog, your rules) is that all of these topics are indeed related. The common thread I see here is your outrage over the reckless, self-centered actions of narcissistic DBs.

      As for Grigori Rasputin, he was almost certainly a sociopathic narcissist too — and therefore would have fit in quite well among today’s New-Wage posers. In fact he is semi-responsible for one crowning accomplishment: he inspired a contemporary narcissistic poser to create a cultish organization that is slowly (very slowly) seeping over the planet. As far as I’m concerned, Rasputin’s contribution has been the gift that keeps on giving:

      PS ~ In the interests of full disclosure, I still use Windows XP. But at least I abandoned my fax machine a few years ago.

      1. @Cosmic Connie ::

        It’s mostly just a compliment how people like to try and boss me. I do think it’s interesting though how the readers who are here mostly for my JAR posts have never complained about the other topics … even though that situation is probably the most pressing and serious of the lot.

        1. @SD, You’re a real, live, caring human being/fake robot, which is much, much more than I can say for JAR. I got your back Salty!

  12. Salty, you have hit the nail on the head with this in such a huge way.

    And you also demonstrated your real talent and value as a critical thinker beyond all this marketing scam garbage.

    Step up your real game to the political scamming and go mainstream. You have the skillz.

    Hell with this chicken shit stuff with “the syndicate”, theres a globe full of REAL syndicates and douchebags that need touched. I sincerely hope you consider moving your game to a much better platform.

  13. I’m sorry but having seen multiple videos of soldiers killing innocent people unnecessarily and then bragging about their kills – and then reading a bunch of apologist type reasons/justifications (they’re protecting our country, it’s the reality of war, it’s unavoidable etc). There is no justification for disrespecting people’s lives and blowing them up, then bragging about it. It’s a fking sad fact that we needed wikileaks to start holding our governments accountable.

    What you are essentially implying Salty is that it’s acceptable that collateral damage occurs in war (ends justify the means), but it’s not okay how Assange runs his show because he’s operating under the same mentality (ends justifying the means). You can’t condemn one and condone the others, that just outs you as a naivity inducing hypocrite. Soldiers are told they are fighting to protect their countries, Wikileaks collaborators feel they are fighting to protect the rights of people. Nobody deserves a free pass when it comes to breaking people’s freedoms to serve their own agendas.

    The larger story is that of raising awareness and becoming aware that our rights are not to be taken for granted. We are responsible because we let people obtain influence and power and use it without proper accountability. Sadly, we needed something like Wikileaks if for no other reason to rub it in the next generations faces that we need to change and we can’t become passive observers.

    It’s similarly sad that we need a site like yours to become aware of those we assign influence in the internet marketing world. You cross the line of respect over and over again because it falls under the justification ‘they don’t deserve respect’. Ends justify the means. I don’t enjoy the constant swearing and personality attacks on this site but on the whole it serves the community because it gets peoples attention and makes people more discerning – a good thing but a sad way to go about it.

    You could argue that many civilians at home hardly respect the dangers we put our military to allegedly protect out freedoms. Those same civilians are ignorant of the freedoms governments take away on a daily basis on their home soil – we must be asleep at the wheel if our governments are doing the things that our being brought to the surface. It’s our problem, our responsibility as a collective. It’s a matter that dwarfs any personal judgments we may have over Assanges haircuts and Sarah Palins knack for public speaking.

    Any outrage we have for assange (deserved or not) should pale by comparison to the outrage we should have for the people we allowed to govern. We didn’t elect Assange, but we did elect our politicians.

    Today, there are more people than ever aware that their rights are at stake. Wikileaks has sped up the desire for controlling parties to further control the internet. There’s a war going on and at least more people are realizing that their freedom is at stake.

    1. @Privacy is a right to be fought for es,

      “I’m sorry but having seen multiple videos of soldiers killing innocent people unnecessarily and then bragging about their kills”

      There are many abuses of power in war, and of course they’re unacceptable, but that isn’t why all soldiers kill. Not even close. Assange did nothing to verify his claim of “collateral murder” before using that video to solicit donations and attract hits to WikiLeaks. Not journalism; not unbiased; not fair. And you’ve seen some videos of other soldiers doing bad things, right? Well there’s obviously no need to look further into this scenario then. God forbid someone might actually do some investigate journalism before declaiming US troops as murderers!

      “Wikileaks collaborators feel they are fighting to protect the rights of people”

      In what way? You’re giving them one hell of a free pass here. What exactly have they done? What has been revealed? What about the net balance of risk/reward, which WikiLeaks so studiously ignores? How does the publishing of the locations of factories and pipelines crucial to Western interests protect my rights? Because oddly enough, I feel less protected when innocent people are hung out to dry; their workplaces singled out on the web for the benefit of terrorist groups.

      I’m definitely not one to take abuses by soldiers lightly, but you really need to start applying some critical thinking towards WikiLeaks. You, like many others, have bought into Assange’s bleeding-heart freedom-of-speech bullshit, without asking any serious questions of him. Don’t just assume he will protect your rights and freedoms. Hold him to account.

      1. @208-577-6210,
        re: “Wikileaks collaborators feel they are fighting to protect the rights of people”

        They wouldn’t be running wikileaks if they didn’t feel that way. Whether they are ultimately protecting the rights of people is not something I claim – it’s hard to ascertain that. The same can be said for soldiers sent out to war, they are there to fight to protect liberties, people etc, but a lot of military action results in the opposite and controlling parties influence the true nature of military involvement. That’s why transparency and accountability is so important. And that’s why my BS alarm goes off when I read something so one sided.

        Like I said in closing in my comment, there are parties that are moving to bring more censorship to the internet now – if they succeed permanently that’s a hell of a bad thing and one could blame Wikileaks for that escalation. But it’s impossible to predict the future and how helpful or destructive wikileaks is in the scheme of things. In the best of light it wakes people up and something good evolves from here through the awareness and coverage, activism, spreading of ideas etc. It could be that the positive results of what wikileaks has helped bring about won’t become visible for a while to come. My hope is that people become more discerning about their government and we establish more accountability.

        There are no un-biased media outlets. Assange obviously has a political agenda – so do other media outlets. Wikileaks of course warrants scrutiny. The hyperfocus on Assange the person (ie. arguing he’s a villain/hero) diminishes the issues that are really at stake. Controlling parties are committing much larger crimes than Assange is being accused of – why are we pointing all our outrage solely at him? Shouldn’t at least be a little proportionate? We have governments turning a blind eye to torture, an oil company infiltrating an african government and doing damage to the environment and its inhabitants, thousands of civilian deaths that are not being reported etc.

        I see a lot of parallels with Salty and Assange, you wouldn’t consider Salty a journalist would you? He obtained and published information that could potentially do damage, from psychological to real. What if someone reads his site, becomes enraged and decides to attack an internet marketer? Would that put blood on his hands? I don’t find it easy to evaluate, I think the same goes for Assange, right now we don’t even know if his personal actions have damaged innocent people yet – or whether his actions might ultimately spark positive change. But there are an awful lot of people that have already set their minds and are eager to discount wikileaks as an entity that wants to bring forth change.

        1. @, I’d concede that there are some parallels between the ways Salty and Assange operate but, without wishing to diminish the standing of this blog, Assange is sitting on information that has a hell of a lot more political significance. Frankly, that brings with it a lot more responsibility, and it is this that he doesn’t appear to be exercising.

          My argument against WikiLeaks is not that I feel governments are beyond the law and should not be held accountable. Leaks have, in the past, played a big role in exposing corruption and criminality in government. If WikiLeaks had any strong sense sense of focus and proportion, then it would home in on these. In its current form, it is a squandered opportunity, and much of that has to do with the way in which Assange uses it to put forward his agenda and garner popularity and attention.

          Assange also appears to have made up his mind that what they are doing is right, BEFORE applying any discretion in his use of the information. This is what’s dangerous. I believe you when you claim that WikiLeaks collaborators believe they are doing good. But the organisation lacks any sense of self-awareness, and so they are poorly placed to make such evaluations. When you look at what is distributed, it’s a very mixed bag: some nuggets of useful information; mostly irrelevant and embarrassing; some dangerous if it fell into the wrong hands. I’m not against disclosure, but it has to be in the public interest. Failing to make that judgement can only push us down one of two unreasonable paths: we either needlessly put lives at risk by publishing without discretion, or we provoke the powers that be into cracking down on free speech altogether. I agree with you that the second path is the more likely, and I also agree that that’s a bad thing.

          Finally, to come back to your ‘blood on his hands’ point, I’m sure that somebody could be provoked by what they read on this blog, and end up doing something stupid. Likewise, if WikiLeaks published a story on a corrupt congressman, there might be someone out there who’d be angry enough to go after him. In these scenarios, both Salty and WikiLeaks are blameless, as the information they’ve published is clearly in the public’s interest, and is more likely to protect than harm them.

          Now what if Salty discovers where Perry Belcher’s daughters go to school? And just decides to slip this information into a ‘Perry Belcher bio’ section on his blog? Or why not feature his address? Because it would be reprehensible, does nothing to protect anybody from his crimes, and can only aid those who seek to do harm to Belcher and his family. It would also, in my view, rather negate his stance as the protector of victims of IM scams. For every one step forward that WikiLeaks takes by publishing a genuinely useful leak, it takes two steps back by advertising factories and pipelines ‘important to US interests’.

  14. I stopped reading at “we carpet bombed.” I didn’t expect Salty to be so delusional as to think “we” ever has anything to do with dropping bombs. Sad.

      1. @SD, So just because you were born some where but never performed any civic duties (like most Americans), you’re still responsible for the “actions of that society”? No my friend. Those who take actions on behalf of society has got said society by the balls. Neither you, nor anyone reading this blog can do anything about bombs that have been dropped in the past or bombs that will be dropped in the future. Stick to IM scams.

  15. I’ve got very mixed feelings on Wikileaks. You express my skepticism about it very well. The other side is expressed equally well here:

    I don’t even know what sort of outcome to hope for– except maybe instead of doing everything to support the government-as-the-great-Satan meme coming up with a smoking gun or two on some of the big banks whose executives have gone directly from near bankruptcy to bailout to bonus without passing go or going to jail and are currently using their ill-gotten gains to purchase their preferred legislation. (Like he CLAIMED he could… If true, what’s the justification for holding out on us THERE, I wonder?)

    Oh, yeah, and Assange should get himself tested for STD’s already and stop being such a dick-headed drama queen.

    1. @Wanderlost ::

      If Mr. Convicted Hacker pants has BofA documents that he can’t publish because he’s made too much trouble for himself by being a fucking moron … then he can send them to me tonight. I’ll make sure that they are distributed appropriately by the end of the weekend … and I won’t request any Person of the Year votes for doing so.

  16. thanks SD for the well written information on this. I didn’t like this whole thing and your article has given me improved clarity.

  17. Actually, Rasputin is famous for one other thing – a huge schlong.

    At least that’s what I learned in high school, from a social studies teacher who was a little on the far side of crazy. The story went that Rasputin’s dick is stored in a jar somewhere because it was so big.

    1. @Anonymous Bastard ::

      … and they say {in the voice of Elaine Benes} that he liked to :: “take it out”.

      He took it out Jerry. He took IT … … … OUT!

      1. @Chris,
        Re that thing in a jar, its widely recognised recognised as a fake (like Barnum’s pickled mermaids) and not even certain to be a dick, let alone Rasputin’s dick.

    1. @Mia ::

      This site was booted from BlueHost more than a year ago. And I’m not sure what you’re implying by putting emphasis on your caps lock sharing.

  18. John Pilger of the Guardian said on Democracy Now! this morning, and I paraphrase:

    “We know of the two major powers in the world. The United States. And the opinions of the people. Wikileaks is the power we’ve all been waiting for. I will literally suck Julian Assange’s cock. Like whenever and wherever.”

    Or something to that effect. He was all spreading his butt cheeks for Wikileaks, and Amy Goodman started tickling his nipples.

    This is a major problem to put it lightly.

    What we’re looking at here is the birth of a new sanctioned progressive movement that has nothing to offer of any value to any progressive-minded rebel. Think Tea Party for the Left: something to get all hyped up on emotions about.

    This is all more mainstream media drama that when analyzed carefully is really some empty ass bullshit designed to distract and detract from true damaging information against the power elite. Subversion is being commandeered and its new poster-boy is Assange.

    More Hegelian dialectics from the corporate media: Left vs Right 2.0

    Hint: neither side has the answers. The point is to divide this country until the republic implodes and is replaced by the Kingdom of Their-Version-of-Jesus. (read Jeff Sharlet’s “C Street”)

    Salty, you are an Internet GOD.

    1. @WN ::

      Amy Goodman had nothing critical to say about this poser?

      The Guardian is dead to me.

      He’s a KNAVE!

      He’s a HERO!

      … or … he’s nothing.

  19. I generally disagree with your Wiki-loathing as well as your Rasputin-nurf (in a historical context, mind you)! With that being said, I say: Go robot! Go robot!

    1. @morten ::

      Rasputin had it coming … and this whole post scored double points for the Romanov reference. That’s fucking high society shit right there!

    1. @Rafael Marquez ::

      The Daily Show has been funny about it.

      And Stephen handed Julian his ass like no one else :: IMO …—julian-assange-extended-interview

      I thought I liked WikiLeaks until I saw that interview. The paragraph in the post about being predisposed to liking it definitely described me … cause it’s just the sort of idea … which properly executed … I’d tend to be a completely gay fanboy for.

  20. OMG, Salty…I have to admit, I’m really, REALLY surprised that you fell for this one, especially since you’ve done so much to “out” the scammers in other industries, as it were. :-(

    Wikileaks, at this point, appears little more than a CIA front operation (i.e. a PsyOps game), or, at the very least, a carefully orchestrated diversion. Have you not thoroughly researched Assange’s background (from real, reliable sources – not just the mainstream ones), or seen the photos of him “wining & dining” with US representatives, or heard about his other inexplicable connections? Have you not noticed the startling “coincidences” between the nature of the Wikileaks releases and aspects of the U.S. Government’s agenda?

    (For instance, the White House had repeatedly discussed the need for more control over the Internet, and the inevitability of having to censor & police the Net for, *ahem*, “National Security” reasons, but few in the general public found their arguments convincing. Lucky for them, though, Wikileaks appeared with magical, enormous data dumps & disclosures, like pink unicorns out of the blue, to remind people exactly why they need to hand over all of their rights & privacy issues to the government, and why those who expose government corruption need to be treated as terrorists! *Facepalm* Amazing, isn’t it? :( )

    This whole thing is so blatantly engineered — from the media hype to the sensationalism of the story to the timing of the releases — to divide & to distract people. The INTENTION is to make people angry & confused…to make bloggers like yourself rant about their opinions (whether they be for or against Wikileaks), to make people question the value of freedom of speech, to confuse people about the issue of the wars and international relations and so on and so forth…and, most of all, to divert the eyes of the public from the other issues at hand — some of which are already being disclosed (by REAL “corruption fighters”), and some of which we don’t even have the vaguest inkling about, yet.

    Honestly, SD, if you’re buying into all of this hype, then I have acres of gorgeous oceanfront property in Arizona that I’d love to sell to you. ;-) But, seriously, it seems as though you’re basing all of your information on what the mainstream resources are (purposely!) feeding to you…and, given your track record with regard to exposing the crooks, that makes me really sad. :( I would have assumed that a person like yourself would have already caught on to the truth, by now…

    1. @Just Say No to Sheepdom!,

      I think the Droid was definitely trying to avoid over-speculation and Gestalt politics, and in doing so provided a fresh viewpoint counter to what we’re hearing in the corporate press.

      While I generally agree with your sentiments, because these overall patterns of divisiveness are detectable, I don’t think Salty fell for anything. He just gave his personal viewpoint, which I thought was applause-worthy.

      Wikileaks has been accused of a lot of things, a CIA front being one of them, but the proof for that would be virtually non-existent, and thus speculative (for now).

      It’s more useful to deconstruct this asshole and move on to deeper topics.

      I concur that we shouldn’t get caught up in what is turning into a circus. We are going to be seeing a lot of Assange in 2011. The perfect gigantic distraction from the 10-year marker of 9/11.

      “See all those demonstrators with ‘9/11 Was An Inside Job’ banners at Ground Zero? They’re actually Julian Assange fanatics. Back to you, Charlie!”

    2. @Just Say No to Sheepdom!,

      I would also add that Assange is nothing in the world of wikileaks. Many genius level people are behind it and it will never be stopped unless the internet is shut down. That’s the only way. So getting all worked up over him is ridiculus. Also, I don’t think the CIA is behind it. But could they leak info to it to help fuel the momentum for a internet kill switch? That’s possible.

      Remember folks don’t believe anything you hear in the mainstream media. It’s all propaganda!

      This reminds me of what the great George Carlin said.

      1. @TD,

        Say it, George. The game is rigged, its always been rigged and, the way we are going, it always will be rigged.

        The only space we can seiously claim as our own is that between our ears, and even that is bombarded with endless propaganda and baited hooks to lure us into oblivion.

    3. @Just Say No to Sheepdom! ::

      Julian Assange is a useless little d-bag whose useless little website is pointless and fundamentally flawed.

      If he’s a front for the CIA :: then I’d be willing to restate that like this …

      The CIA has built a useless front by using a useless little d-bag whose useless little website is pointless and fundamentally flawed.

      Feel better?

      1. @SD,

        Useless? Hardly…in fact, your very own words & reaction attest to just how effective he (or “they”) really is.
        If he were simply “a useless little d-bag”, would he have been able to manipulate you – someone who appears to pride himself on the research & exposure of corruption – so easily, or to evoke/provoke such a strong, passionate emotional response (as evidenced by your blog post), in you? It seems that you, along with quite a few other bloggers & pundits, took the bait willingly, and delivered to the NSA, the White House, and a host of other national governments & agencies the early holiday gift that they had been hoping for: the message that the right to free speech is something that is not so fundamental a right, after all, and that the public should question & vilify any and all who seek to challenge the bureaucracy’s version of “truth”…a message that is, most importantly (to them), being delivered by those who claim to be against corruption, themselves. Rather than simply ignore the Wikileaks drama & continue your own pursuit of the truth, you chose to specifically devote time to spreading a message in support of disinfo & against the greater good of the public at large (whether you realized it or not). So…well done, I guess; you’ve shown how anyone can be used as a “pawn” in the campaign to cover up the truth, and how susceptible we all are to the attempts at manipulation by others (be it con artists, IM scammers, or our own elected officials).
        Simply put, would you have intentionally devoted a whole blog to someone who you really consider to be “useless”? If so…isn’t that a bit insulting to your readers, and to yourself? If he truly were useless, then he wouldn’t even matter to anyone, would he; if he were ineffective, then he wouldn’t even be worth addressing here, at all. The man, himself, is only a man, yet the operation he is a part of is making headlines & spurring debates in nations across the globe. Contrary to what you stated, he has risen to become tremendously useful to the powers that be, indeed.
        (On a side note, do you not find it odd that the hyped figures always seem to be such imperfect, easily discredited humans – and, thus, equally dispensable & cast aside, once the greater agenda is accomplished – while the real “freedom fighters” of sound character & flawless backgrounds are granted no such attention or notice? That those who actually uncover the REAL truth are rarely provided the mainstream means with which to convey their evidence and proof to the public? Just something to ponder…)
        I am genuinely shocked at your reaction & responses on this issue. Overall, the governments (& related bureaucratic figures) on this planet are, by far, the greatest “con artists”, of all, and create more widespread destruction & devastation than any “IM kingpin” ever could…yet you seem to be insinuating that that the truth should only be exposed with regard to the little guys, & that greater magnitudes of corruption should not be uncovered & disclosed to the public. I, for one, choose not to remain ignorantly blissful…and, given your apparent motives for creating this website, I had (perhaps incorrectly) assumed that you were inclined to choose the same. It’s just disappointing, really…

        (BTW, I’m can’t personally vouch for the veracity of all of the information that is located on this web page, but, on the subject of Wikileaks, it’s well worth checking out:

        Even if you don’t have time to watch the video on the page, the very brief article below it is quite intriguing.)

  21. Damn… Good detective work, SD.

    Speaking of “leaks” and being at the right place at the right time… I overheard three pissed Traffic Geyser (TG) affiliates talking at the bar after a recent internet marketing meet-up group. They said there’s some sneaky shit going on there with the newest SMMM product launch.

    Apparently, TG didn’t tell affiliates that their regular affiliate links would not give them credit for opt-ins or sales even though those links re-direct to the SMMM checkout cart. It would seem the cookie easily transfers but it doesn’t.

    So, you have all these affiliates (probably the B-team) driving traffic, then getting screwed because TG just swallows those leads and keeps the commissions themselves. That’s just bad business and sketchy…

    1. @JJ,

      We’ll see if they’re cowards or actually have some balls and out TG for using such shoddy practices. My guess is that many of them will be cowards and just keep taking the crumbs the A-team throws at them…fucken idiots.

      You Tube Video References:



      Question for SD, how does one embed youtube video’s in the comments, or why my posts with URL links never show?

        1. @Ross Jeffries,

          It’s cuz you’re getting old and gray and that will certainly limit the pussy you’ll be able to attract, even with all those lame >below me< patterns. Not to mention that having started late at getting girls into bed for meaningless sex (most start at 16 not 46), all other milestones related to intimacy are naturally going to be late too.

        2. @Ross Jeffries, good article. Congratulations on your spirited use of the letter “M,” by the way. A few more years of therapy, and perhaps you’ll be able to recite the 7 letters that follow.

        3. @Ross Jeffries ::

          yeah good article.

          I don’t remember you getting married in the movie about your life … I thought you just got increasingly frustrated until you broke into song and it rained frogs.

          This marrying Danish boobs ending is much more conventional and I don’t think it plays as well … no offense.

  22. Hi Droid,et al. I’m back online (as if it matters that I wasn’t.) Bought a refurbished computer. It has XP,too, Connie! Yep,scammers are everywhere and you are spot on about Assange. Love the comparison to Rasputin. I hadn’t heard about the Rasputin’g “member” but had read he allegedly never bathed which didn’t stop Russian high society women from lifting their petticoats for him so they could benefit from his magical powers.

    Thought I’d share this article to humorously illustrate how far some people will go to scam others. This guy was arrested for pretending to be autistic just to get his adult diapers changed by female caretakers!!!

      1. @Anna, Thanks. Good to be back. I agree with @Rafael Marquez, this topic brought out a whole new trove of anti-Droid trolls. Speaking of little ugly creatures with totally weird eyes, the guy in the article is only 4’9″ tall!!

  23. Wikileaks brings up a lot of emotion for people. For Americans, one emotion has been fear. At times fear can be justified. If lives are put a risk, fear is a reasonable response.

    Another source of fear is questioning of deeply seeded beliefs. For example, many Americans believe in the concept of American exceptionalism – that our country is different than other countries, we value democracy, and our motives (even in war) are for the most part pure with the intent of helping others.

    Wikileaks challenges that notion on two levels:
    1. The first level is the leaks themselves. They paint the US in a bad light and suggest that the US is duplicitous and dangerous (more on this below).

    2. The second level is the contradiction between American exceptionalism and calls for censorship & assassination of WikiLeaks and its founder for publishing information the American government doesn’t want people to know. Those two concepts don’t juxtapose neatly and an angry fear-fueled reaction isn’t surprising.

    For people who are proud to be American, being confronted with ideas that call the rationale for that pride into question can be jarring psychologically.

    The American press has focused more on the scandalous aspects of Wikileaks’ founder than on the scandalous aspects of the leaks themselves. The Wikileaks founder is “creepy” and “pasty” and compared to Hitler.

    Let’s acknowledge a few basic facts as the debate continues:

    #1. Does Wikileaks dump documents indiscriminately?

    Wikileaks has only released 1,532 out of over 250,000 of the leaked cables as of this writing. Almost every one of those documents was first published by one of Wikileaks newpaper partners (NY Times, Guardian, etc.) with the same redactions as applied by those newspapers. Source:

    Associated Press

    #2. What of significance have the cables leaked by WikiLeaks revealed?

    Glenn Greenwald of does a good job documenting several:

    — US purposefully turning a blind eye to the torture of Iraqi prisoners
    — US suppressing investigations into torture by the CIA in Spain & Germany
    — 15,000 people killed in Iraq that were previously unaccounted for
    — US conducting a secret war in Yemen

    See Glenn’s post (linked above) for more as well as for links to the cables themselves.

    #3. Should criticisms of Wikileaks by US journalists such as John Burns be taken seriously?

    Perhaps. They have a point of view that should be considered. But also consider that Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers and is widely hailed a hero for doing so, considers Bradley Manning and WikiLeaks to both be heroes.

    In his comment, @WN was was reluctant to list the actual quote from award winning journalist John Pilger of the Guardian. I’ll list it here:

    “Well, what Julian Assange and WikiLeaks is doing is what journalists should have been doing. I mean, I think you mention the reaction to him. Some of the hostility, especially in the United States, from some of those very highly paid journalists at the top has been quite instructive, because I think that they are shamed by WikiLeaks. They are shamed by the founder of WikiLeaks, who is prepared to say that the public has a right to know the secrets of governments that impinge on our democratic rights. WikiLeaks is doing something very Jeffersonian. It was Jefferson who said that information is the currency of democracy.”


    Salty said:
    “If any group of people deserve the benefit of the fucking doubt :: and the absolute guarantee of due process BEFORE judgment :: it’s the dudes we send to die by rockets and bombs so that we can commute sixty miles each day to Stepford Wives Villas where our fat :: spoiled :: children won’t have to brush up against any black people.”

    Agreed. And the best way to give our troops the benefit of the doubt is to give them the benefit of the truth. The alternative puts them in harms way for secret reasons and in secret wars, a point Ron Paul makes more eloquently here:

    1. @andyhair ::

      There should be a severe fine {or public spanking} for anyone describing WikiLeaks as “Jeffersonian” … holy fucking ignorant beyond belief.

      Well, what Julian Assange and WikiLeaks is doing is what journalists should have been doing.

      Doing things like … Not actually writing? Not processing raw facts into digestible chunks? Not doing on the ground intelligence? Not getting first hand accounts? Not consulting experts or officials? Not providing sufficient context? Not behaving like responsible members of the societies that they live in?

      Read ONE fucking issue of the The Economist cover-to-cover and you’ll learn more about the world than four years of supposed “journalism” by WikiLeaks.

      1. The attacks against WikiLeaks and its founder are the same attacks that were made against Daniel Ellsberg when he leaked the Pentagon Papers, at least according to…Daniel Ellsberg:

        Mr. Ellsberg may have even more historical context than the Economist magazine, but let’s turn to them…

        The Economist takes a more nuanced view of WikiLeaks and lauds several positive outcomes of WikiLeaks:

        As for my view of the Economist, I don’t find it all that enlightening. I have a few friends who read it cover to cover (as you suggest) yet they couldn’t even tell you a rough high-level breakdown between discretionary and mandatory spending in the US budget, or what that distinction means. Perhaps they’re behind a few issue though.

        As for the “hard/expensive expensive work” of journalism done by the NY Times: The myth of weapons of mass destruction was born on the pages of the NY Times. Over 100,000 people have died since, and US soldiers have gone to war sacrificing life & limb for that false pretense.

        As for Julian Assange possibly being prosecuted under the 1917 Espionage Act…20 members of the Columbia School of Journalism have signed a letter to President Obama and Attorney Eric Holder expressing their opposition to charging the Wikileaks founder:

        Then again, maybe at Columbia they study “new journalism” and not the “hard/expensive work” of real journalism.

        Turning to real old-school journalists and their methods, Glenn Greenwald sites examples of journalists at the NY Times and Washington Post encouraging leaks and winning Pulitzer Prizes for doing so.

        If the US government prosecutes Julian Assange for encouraging leaks, it will have a tough time making the distinction between what Wikileaks did and what the NY Times and Washington Post do regularly.

        1. @andyhair ::

          Your comments are so he-said-she-said stupid.

          Julian is dangerous and pointless garbage. He has crime in his eyes … he’s been convicted of crimes … he treats everyone else in the world like dogshit … his “journalism” when looked at objectively is non existant and/or childishly stupid … he has all the harmarks of a sociopath … someone else {Manning} did all the actual snooping and leaking … his website pretends that it’s more than it is … he spends suspiciously too much time soliciting money and spends the rest puffing up his chest.

          And now someone who is a specialist at calling out web posers {that’s me!} :: whose site has experienced 700% more censorship by corporate whores {that’s called “street cred” mother fuckers} :: has called him out on all these things. Got anything to say about him specifically … in defense of these specifically classless actions … and in light of his apparent fucking uselessness?

          Cause I don’t give a shit about your “New York Times started the war” type opinionations.

          I’m not calling him out because I’m afraid America gots her lil’ imperialist feelings hurt … I’m calling him out because I think he’s Internet crap … and calling out Internet crap is what I do.

          1. @SD,

            Hate to disagree, Mr Salty, but when did the descriptor “he has crime in his eyes” pass muster as a legal argument?
            Sounds more like a lynch mob leader cranking up the rhetoric to get the bloodlust up in the gang.
            There’s a place for that, though not very often, on the battlefield–but very few other places amongst thinking people where such stupid rhetoric is acceptable.

            1. @Stoic ::

              Disagree all you want my friendly friend :: but …

              1. That’s not a legal argument … it’s a personal opinion/assessment which I’ve earned the right to give {although you are certainly free to discount it to zero}.

              2. “Crime in his eyes” is more than rhetoric. Liars and deceivers do very particular things with their face … and it burns on. There is good science behind that … and a person can go out of their way to develop expertise in the detection of the deceitful face.

              Once learning the basics of that technique … a person might get even better at it by doing it non stop over the course of several years.

              Not admissible in court :: not solely sufficient to form the basis of any determination :: but still a data point.

        2. @andyhair,

          Yo man. You need to write a blog, dude. Nice links and good points.

          However, do take into consideration that Cryptome was the original document-leaking website that the mainstream/corporate media didn’t even acknowledge (to my knowledge). All of a sudden, Wikileaks comes around doing the same exact thing (except with a money motive) and the press is having a field day. A FIELD DAY!!!

          So, pardon my suspicions, but I believe Wikileaks is a hijacking of actual subversion in this country. Not to mention a great tool for convincing the public that Iran has nukes that we should be very very afraid of. Beware the sanctioned rebellion. Beware the Fake Progressives. When the Gatekeeper Media points a spotlight, it’s usually so you won’t see what’s going on in the dark.

          Assange now becomes the newest authority on all things awesome for the Left, even if that includes entering into another war.

    2. @andyhair,

      I wasn’t reluctant to list the actual quote from Pilger. I just heard him on the radio on my commute so I couldn’t jot it all down word for word. But as you graciously and accurately illustrate, this story is shaping up to be another party line division. You’re either with Beck and Hannity or with Pilger and Goodman. No thinking required.

  24. US Tries to Build Case for Conspiracy by WikiLeaks

    Private Manning is also said to have claimed that Mr. Assange gave him access to a dedicated server for uploading some of them to WikiLeaks.

    Adrian Lamo, an ex-hacker in whom Private Manning confided and who eventually turned him in, said Private Manning detailed those interactions in instant-message conversations with him.

    He said the special server’s purpose was to allow Private Manning’s submissions to “be bumped to the top of the queue for review.” By Mr. Lamo’s account, Private Manning bragged about this “as evidence of his status as the high-profile source for WikiLeaks.”

    If Assange solicited these leaks … then he better raise a hell of lot more than $200K for his defense. “bumped to the top of queue for review” … makes it sound like Manning was being worked over by the White Witch … very interesting.

    Even more interesting :: I somehow missed that Wired published a partial transcript of Manning’s chats with Lamo …

    (03:10:32 PM) Manning: at first glance… it was just a bunch of guys getting shot up by a helicopter… no big deal… about two dozen more where that came from right… but something struck me as odd with the van thing… and also the fact it was being stored in a JAG officer’s directory… so i looked into it… eventually tracked down the date, and then the exact GPS co-ord… and i was like… ok, so thats what happened… cool… then i went to the regular internet… and it was still on my mind… so i typed into goog… the date, and the location… and then i see this

    1. He knew this tape was significant because it was already being looked at by the official overseers of battlefield conduct.

    2. He figured out it was the Reuters incident because he read about it in The New York Times. Ha! There’s a picture of the van and everything. Good thing for “new journalism” that “old journalism” is still around to do all the hard/expensive work.

    3. Julian said they spent months decrypting this thing right? So I guess that was a lie.

    1. @SD,

      ‘He knew this tape was significant because it was already being looked at by the official overseers of battlefield conduct.’

      And what do the overseers of battlefield conduct generally do? Ignore anything that works against themselves and, if undeniably caught out, as in Abu Ghraib, pillory a few low-ranking scapegoats while the command structure that orders and allows such actions, is held blameless. So its business as usual within a day.

      Remind anyone of the banking debacle and its outcome? Who always carries the can and pays the bill?

  25. Assanger is playing with fire, a 22 year old guy is jailed (for propably life) and the not-hacker prince with his white long white rpg-adventure-hair just keeps posing, moving forward on his fake crusade towards a dubious claim for “open democracy”, free speech and self-righteous hype about exposing “secret” government information. It’s pathetic.

    He is a Nacristic wannabe johnny memonic’s who’s come out of thin air, and now he sees the potential to play a hero in a world of inter-communication and high speed.

    Big fail, may the internet silence him out, I don’t care. I don’t buy him and I don’t buy what he stands for…(nothing)

  26. We need more sites like Wikileaks!
    “Number 1: Do the America People deserve know the truth regarding the ongoing wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen?

    Number 2: Could a larger question be how can an army private access so much secret information?

    Number 3: Why is the hostility directed at Assange, the publisher, and not at our governments failure to protect classified information?

    Number 4: Are we getting our moneys worth of the 80 Billion dollars per year spent on intelligence gathering?

    Number 5: Which has resulted in the greatest number of deaths: lying us into war or Wikileaks revelations or the release of the Pentagon Papers?

    Number 6: If Assange can be convicted of a crime for publishing information that he did not steal, what does this say about the future of the first amendment and the independence of the internet?

    Number 7: Could it be that the real reason for the near universal attacks on Wikileaks is more about secretly maintaining a seriously flawed foreign policy of empire than it is about national security?

    Number 8: Is there not a huge difference between releasing secret information to help the enemy in a time of declared war, which is treason, and the releasing of information to expose our government lies that promote secret wars, death and corruption?

    Number 9: Was it not once considered patriotic to stand up to our government when it is wrong?

    Thomas Jefferson had it right when he advised ‘Let the eyes of vigilance never be closed’ ”

    Help make this video go viral:

    1. @MoreWikileaks,

      The clincher in the WMD argument for going to war against Saddam was provided by Bush’s poodle Tony Blair. He disregarded the intel gathered by the professionals and instead plagiarised a document lifted from the internet and written by a very young and clueless student. That was the intel that Blair fed to Bush as the legal basis for going to war–not that Bush was much bothered at the time about any legal basis but the propaganda plagiarised from the uninformed student helped to sell the notion to the world.
      This has been exhaustively researched and admitted in Europe, by all the players.
      I can’t believe we bought it then, what are we being asked to buy now?

  27. You might be correct in your critiques about Assange SD, but I don’t see donating as being fraud, and this is one of your points against Assange. He is supported financially by several multi-millionires for his living expenses, and the donations are for the various operations of the WL site.

    1. @Tatiana, Assange SPECIFICALLY asked for donations for the defense of his alleged source. His alleged source has stated he never received ANY of it and is currently rotting in jail while Hollywood stars (who don’t even live in reality themselves) provide Assange with cash and luxury. Sorry, Assange is scum.

    2. @Tatiana,

      “He is supported financially by several multi-millionires for his living expenses.”

      How very Rasputinish of him.

      1. @SD,

        This is completely irrelevant, but that picture of Rasputin looks so much like that creepy guy who kidnapped Elizabeth Smart a few years back, I did a double-take.

        Rasputin was so difficult to kill, I briefly wondered if he was still alive and wandering around Utah.

    1. @Papa, Not more marketing bullshit and bullshitters. Theres so many of these idiots who are actually MARKETERS who run from one sales item to the next whatever is the flavor of the day. Then when that fails they turn to religion and hope like hell they dont get caught. Some do, some will, some already have and its a really shitting life when that happens.

  28. Creepy Assange seems a little off the beaten path for this blog. But he is creepy and he is a narcissist, so maybe he does fit the regular themes.

    As for whether he’s a real journalist … who cares. If people die because of his desire for 15 minutes of fame, I hope they toss him in a cell with Death Ray (as long as we’re not subjected to WikiLeaks of Ray Beam’s idiotic psychobabble).

    Footnote: Truly unbiased main stream media reporting is a myth almost on par with IM pink unicorns.

    1. @SandDune ::

      Military prisons are hardcore … and lots of military types consider his actions treasonous … so I imagine he’ll be spending many more years segregated and alone … slowly/rapidly going insane.

      Consenting to an alternate system of crime and punishment {where there are more rules :: stiffer penalties for breaking rules :: and far less procedural protection} is just one of the many luxury perks associated with the phat $20,000 salary of a Army E-3.

      Call your local recruiter today!

  29. Oh noes!! Someone is shooting at them!! Oh my dog! Because it is of course completely natural that someone who invades your country with guns, tank and attack helicopters (and millions of people die as a result) be showered with bonbons and teddy bears! How rude!

    And are you seriously saying that murdering civilians is moral because the government of your “country” has done it many times before. Is that it? Is that your justification? Morally bankrupt.

    And the GOVERNMENT of the United States of America put pressure on the web providers not the United States of America. Having your relatives work for the government and the IRS (yuck!) has always completely clouded your mind and now you have shown it for everyone to see.

    If Kern and all the other IMtards are criminals (and they are) then your relative who worked for the IRS (institutionalised theft by force) is an even bigger one and ignorant to boot.

  30. Well, it seems that the information (apparently put out by Assange’s lawyer) about the nature of the charges against him is entirely misleading: the charge is rape. There is no such thing as ‘sex by surprise’ in Swedish law any more than in British or American law. That is, two charges of rape and one of not using a condom after he’d agreed to do so. (At which point, by inference, consent was withdrawn, so I suppose this can also be reasonably characterized as rape, even if it might not be considered so under some legal systems.) There’s a big Twitter campaign going on now at #mooreandme to get Michael Moore to apologize for repeating the misinformation and denigrating the alleged victims- as well as linking to reports which named the accusers and apparently has led to their being harassed and threatened with rape and death in order to get them to withdraw the charges.

    Entertainment Weekly (of all places) has quite a good summary of the campaign including links to an article on the differences between Swedish and American law.

    By the way, if you type in #mooreandme on Twitter you won’t see anything recent at first. It shows the most recent Tweet as hours ago… Wait a few minutes and you’ll begin to get the latest Tweets. A few minutes more and you’ll see they’re coming fast and furious. Interesting. I’ve never seen that with a hashtag before.

  31. The Agenda Behind WikiLeaks

    The Salty Droid is very much on the mark about Assange and Wikileaks.

    Some of the information provided by Wikileaks is good and shows us how transparent and sincere and “common good” focused the government really is.

    The attack on it shows, how much the big brother loves to watch its subjects and hates being watched himself.

    However, this is the tip of the iceberg. Most of you will likely be quite suprised about wikileaks’ real agenda once you’ve watched the following 3 videos with comments by mr. Tarpley. It’s videos 2, 3, 4 and 5 of a five-part series.

    1. Start 11 minutes 30 sec into this video (2/5);

    2. Then go to video 3/5

    3. Then here 4/5

    4. And finally here 5/5

  32. Dude, WikiLeaks is the SHIT. Salty, you are a good for nothing, lowlife, failed internet marketer who has nothing better to do than piss on everyone else. Fuck you and all of your faggoty little fuckface fans. Last night I bought a fuck doll, wrote your name on it, and busyed my nuts all over it’s fgace and in it’s asshole!

    After that, I pullede up your website and pissed on my cpmputer screen while it was on the wcreen. Then, I threw the computer out the windown and took my dog out to shit on the remains. Your gay ass “bleep bloop” was still on the screen.

    Bleeep bloop my cock and make it puke you ignorant ass lowlife, dingleberry-eating cocksucker.

    P.S. – If you are a fan of this website you are one of the dumbest, no-life having motherfuckers that ever lived.

    Later fuckfaces!

      1. @Jimmy Ray, No, you “be” a fucking copycat asswiping dicklick.

        Go fuck a cat in the asshole like I’m gonna fuck your hairy fat ass wife.

        1. @Chris,

          There is no shortage of insults, unfortunately, that would be inaccurate when directed at you. Like Ken said, fat and balding, and I could add virgin for example. Not that there is anything wrong with being a virgin, if the only reason was that you chose to be. In your case, it’s by default.

  33. P.S. – In one instance you are all about free speech. In the next, you rag on someone else who belives in it.

    You are nothing more than a confused little child with no life and no prospects outside of this awful website that takes forever to load.

    Get some real web hosting you dumb cocksucker.

    1. @Chris, You are truly ridiculous. You do know that reading this blog is entirely voluntary right? You should find one that you like and post your fantasies there.

      1. @what??,

        I can’t believe that this is the same Chris who is the admin at http://www DOT bigmarketingtools DOT com, as the link in his name suggests, because if it is the kid is seriously deranged. How embarrassing. Really though, it has to be someone fucking with him, to smear his image.

        There can only be one of two options:

        1) Deranged and in need of medications
        2) Lame frame job

          1. @what??,

            Well I notified the Admin at that site that someone is potentially impersonating him and making him look like an ass here.

            If there is no response, then the Chris here must certainly be the Admin of that site.

            Still, I can’t imagine anyone acting this pathetic just for link-juice.

            How utterly sad.

            1. @Ken Cleavage,

              I’m not sure about that site but the picture on his comments here is of Christopher Mollo. (I only know that from this blog.) At various times, he has acted out in the same manner. At one point, he was ranting incoherently because he couldn’t sell his ezine articles. So I read one or two…and quickly realized why he was having trouble with that.

              If someone is impersonating him, it’s been going on for awhile. I highly doubt that’s the case. I agree with you…pathetic and utterly sad.

    2. @Chris, Listen chucklehead: this blog is SD’s, and it reflects HIS free speech, tool. If you want to follow the albino narcissist, go right ahead. He’d just use your bald head for a mirror to admire himself. You are one seriously disturbed whack job.

      1. @Bullshit Detector, The only bullshit you detect is the stuff you chew on you cocksucking assfuck. Lick my dick till it pukes bitch! This blog SUCKS the veiny cock!

  34. Droid, thank you. I disliked the Wikileaks situation.

    Here is why:

    Too much was done on impulse, and without editorial judgement. Mr Assange, according to the New York Times article, lived a rather nomadic life with his parents. He flits around, all over the world, and has no stable ties to any community.

    He would not be able to understand the risks run by persons who in war torn countries, work as employees and interpreters for the US. They cannot just pick up and run if their cover is blown by Wikileaks; unlike Mr Assange, these persons are tied to their tribes, their neighborhoods, their families.

    Mr A didnt seem to care about the price in blood that might be paid by the persons left exposed–the little people.

    Two, Mr A doesnt understand that for diplomacy to work, privacy is needed. How would he like it if someone snooped into his medical records and Wikileaked them to the whole world?

    Three, he acts on impulse and makes childish, tantrum like threats to leak yet more material. Four, many who approve of Mr Assange show their support by hacking companies that chose, freely not to accept payments for support of Wikileaks.

    Mr Assange is, in my opinion, an impulsive child in an adult body, who happened to learn to wear a suit and tie. And he’s acting like a toddler who has gotten hold of Jupiters’ thunderbolt and doesnt have the reflection or humility to understand the responsibilities of having such information in his hands.

    He lacks what used to be called ‘gravitas’–essential seriousness. Acts on impulse and throws tantrums, using the rhetoric of anarchy to rationalize it.

    Sadly, this is such a common reaction pattern that Assange has plenty of company to cheer for him.

    A person like this is incapable of editorial judgement.

    Assange is as much of a lightweight as GW Bush and the nasty boys in adult bodies who surrounded him in the White House.

    Assange is a drifter whose decision endangered people who do not have the easy option of running away.

  35. And, yes, let us keep in mind that for the past seven months PFC Manning has been in the brig.

    By contrast Son Altesse Assange was arrested in London, released on bail for $316,000 (maybe thats where the money went?)

    “Assange, in a dark gray suit, arrived at court in a van under heavy security, according to the British newspaper and Bloomberg news service. Bail conditions require him to stay at a designated home in Suffolk, report to police daily and wear an electronic tag.”

    Now, here are some details about where Assange was assigned to stay:

    “To finally stick the knife into the once great site that was Wikileaks, Julian Assange will be spending some time in the Georgian splendour of Ellingham Hall, Bungay,Suffolk, England.

    It’s the 650-acre the home of Journalist and Frontline Club founding member Vaughan Smith.

    Ellingham is a “sustainable farm and shoot in traditional parkland“. Some of the produce ends up at the Frontline Club’s restaurant:

    Nowhere else within 100 miles sources raw materials from its own farm, offers wines at not much above retail prices, and has a chef who puts his heart into every dish.

    What’s on offer?

    With the winds and rain beating down- escape to the delights of the Frontline restaurant to warm up on rack of lamb, rump steak or roast cod- followed by a cheeky steamed treacle pudding with fresh Jersey cream…

    Can you kill it yourself – Julian? Lookout!! (He sure can pull the birds.)

    We offer days of between 150-200 birds, charging £25 per bird. Full teams are preferred. The shoot makes a very good day for 8 guns but 9 can be accommodated for teams. Six drives are chosen for each day according to the weather and wind direction on the day.

    Vaughan is a journalist of independent means:

    Prior to setting up Frontline, Vaughan was briefly a microlight test pilot and cameraman. Before that he was an officer in the British Army’s Grenadier Guards, serving in Northern Ireland, Cyprus and Germany. He captained the British Army shooting team and won the inter-army rifle shooting championship.

    Vaughan also owns and runs a farm in eastern England, which provides organic ingredients for the Frontline Restaurant. As the manager of Frontline, he is in charge of the management of a two million pound business, and employs more than 40 people.

    All very agreeable for any true capitalist, such as Julian Assange.

    Now by contrast, here is what Bradley Manning gets at the brig. Nothing is said about the toilet. If its anything like jail, the loo will be stainless steel. A very far cry from the mannered graces of Ellingham Hall.


    Shower shoes (1) Underwear (6) (White/brown)

    Boots (no steel toe) (1) Socks (6 pr) (Black, Green, White)

    PT Shorts (2) Towels (2) (Green for Marines, White for Navy, Brown for Army, and Black for Air Force)

    Toothpaste (1) Face Cloths (2) (White, Green or Brown)

    Toothbrush/holder (1) T-Shirts (6)

    Boot Blouses (no metal) (1) Shampoo/conditioner (1)

    Soap (Bar) (2) Razors (disposable) (maximum of 10)

    Deodorant (1) Razor handles (1)

    Nail Clippers (no file) (1) Razor blades (10)

    Soap Dish (1) Shoe polish (no liquid – permitted only if individual possesses boots that are required to be shined) (1)

    Comb / brush (plastic) (1/1) Shaving Cream (Foam Only) (1)

    PT Shoes (non eccentric) (1) Sweat Top & Bottom (1) (Seasonal)

    Toilet Paper (8)

    $ 100 cash or money order in the name of the inmate

    The following items are NOT authorized at the Quantico Base Brig:

    Any excess gear items containing alcohol; wallets; jewelry; dog tags; watches; gel shaving cream / gel deodorant; checkbook; waxed dental floss; keys; retractable pens/pencils.

    (Note this is from a conservative website so the comments match. Here is a URL from a military website for brig protocol)

    ‘Authorized Gear Upon Confinement’

    and a 1997 from the Baltimore Sun

  36. From the Baltimore Sun, 1997–no touching your bed/’rack’ even when not working.

    Just think about this: Until lights out, you cannot flop down on your bunk to read, pull a pillow over your head, etc.

    Years back when I got arrested at a peace demonstration, and spent a couple of days in jail, we girls could lie back on our bunks during the day.

    Being in the brig…sheeit. You are up at 5 am and lights out at 10 pm.

    From the Baltimore Sun:

    “The brig is a world apart from civilian prison.

    City jails have their spitting inmates, jail-yard gangs, needy drug addicts and mysterious food. Quantico’s three hallways shine under bright lights and smell of floor wax. Only the eerie tinkle of leg irons and shouted commands break the silence. The cook won a competition for his creations.

    While clean and safe, the brig demands vigilance from the 150 military inmates who fill its high-ceiling dorms and dim cells. Though most will never serve a day in uniform again, they abide by a military routine that wakes them up at 5 a.m., puts most of them to work on the base grounds all day and forces them into bed by 10 p.m.

    “Sometimes,” said the former midshipman, “they would send us into the woods with lawn mowers. Just for something to do.”

    The rules are endless. No touching your bed, or “rack,” during working hours — even if you’re not working. No more than 20 personal photos in a cell. ”

    “The light is almost too dim to read by, but regulations do not allow for sleep between 5 a.m. and 6 p.m.

    “A lot of times you just sit there, to be quite honest,” said the midshipman, who served in special quarters because he was classified as an officer. “You just stare into space.”

    Visitors moving though the dark halls catch glimpses of people inside, sitting on the small chairs. These are “maximum in”prisoners, never let out without handcuffs, leg irons and two escorts. They do not work.

    Former Aberdeen drill instructor Delmar G. Simpson spent six months in Quantico’s Special Quarters 1 before his rape trial. His lawyers argued that the routine, which required shackling him for the 11 steps it took to get to his morning shower, constituted punishment before verdict.”

    As of 1997 in Special Quarters I

    “After all, there is a TV room with videos where prisoners are allowed several hours a week, cafeteria food, offerings from a vault-sized library that range from Bill Gates’ “The Road Ahead” to Low Rider magazine to a variety of self-help publications.

    “The rest of the brig feels more like camp than incarceration.

    The low-risk prisoners and the small number of female inmates stay in barracks-like dorms. Large floor fans cool the airy, sunlit rooms. Sneakers are lined up in four rows under the cots, and footlockers are maintained perfectly for spot inspections.

    A makeshift chapel is partitioned off in the corner of the lowest security dorm. Services are held regularly, and once a month prisoners are taken on a religious retreat nearby. Self-help groups meet daily, including one, Hart said, “for the ladies to ventilate their emotions.”

    “Prisoners can smoke on a tennis court-sized patio during designated times. The wall is rimmed with razor wire; guards, dressed in camouflage, stand watch. Brig mythology holds that a Marine who allows his prisoner to escape does the time himself.

    The mess hall is decorated in blues and greens, the prints on the walls giving it the feel of a corporate cafeteria, and bursts with selections — spaghetti, burgers, Polish sausage, spinach. Slices of apple and lemon meringue pie spin in a refrigerated display case.

    “That’s one thing they never complain about: the food,” Hart said.

    Behind the brig stretches a 2-acre field with pull-up bars, basketball courts and trimmed grass. Low-risk prisoners exercise under supervision, and Hart requested money to build a fenced-in area within the field for “maximum-in” prisoners. Inmates have requested a Frisbee.

    Hart, upon retiring from a 22-year Marine Corps career specializing in corrections, has taken a job as the No. 2 official in the 550-bed Chattanooga, Tenn., city jail. He knows it will be different running a civilian prison.

    The rules will be looser and the inmates unruly. They can yell and sleep when they want. There will be no chain of command among the prison population to fall back on.

    Smiling warily, Hart said: “The guards there all wear flak jackets.”

    Pub Date: 7/22/97″

    1. @noodlebowl,

      From ‘radical wales’:

      “Bradley Manning needs our solidarity and support now more than ever. I will examine the arguments and possibilities for a Welsh solidarity campaign for Bradley Manning in another article. For now, though, here are a couple of suggestions:

      Firstly, take a few minutes to write to Bradley Manning. The small act of solidarity in sending a letter or card means a lot to a political prisoner, one indication that the world has not forgotten them. Christmas is coming and it was Bradley Manning’s 23rd birthday on 17 December. You can send letters, cards and postcards to: Bradley Manning, c/o Courage to Resist, 484 Lake Park Ave #41, Oakland CA 94610, United States. Letters will be opened, “contraband” discarded and the letters then mailed in a weekly package to Bradley via an individual currently on his approved correspondence list.

      Secondly, familiarise yourself with Bradley Manning’s story. If we’re going to have any sort of solidarity campaign, we need to know the details and the issues, to understand what’s at stake and to share this information with others. Please take the time to read about Bradley Manning. This article by Denver Nicks has a lot of background details,
      Bradley Manning needs our solidarity and support now more than ever. I will examine the arguments and possibilities for a Welsh solidarity campaign for Bradley Manning in another article. For now, though, here are a couple of suggestions:

      Firstly, take a few minutes to write to Bradley Manning. The small act of solidarity in sending a letter or card means a lot to a political prisoner, one indication that the world has not forgotten them. Christmas is coming and it was Bradley Manning’s 23rd birthday on 17 December. You can send letters, cards and postcards to: Bradley Manning, c/o Courage to Resist, 484 Lake Park Ave #41, Oakland CA 94610, United States. Letters will be opened, “contraband” discarded and the letters then mailed in a weekly package to Bradley via an individual currently on his approved correspondence list.

      Secondly, familiarise yourself with Bradley Manning’s story. If we’re going to have any sort of solidarity campaign, we need to know the details and the issues, to understand what’s at stake and to share this information with others. Please take the time to read about Bradley Manning. This article by Denver Nicks has a lot of background details,

      while the Bradley Manning solidarity website has details on the campaign to support him and secure his release.”

  37. This kills your credability, just makes you seem like a little upset person about everything. Stick to crying about internet marketers making too much money I think at least there is some kind of theme to that.

    1. @Jason,

      Kills his credibility with who? You? Based on the traffic to this site and the number of comments, he appears to be doing just fine. Perhaps he should write about whatever the hell he wants to write about. It is, after all, his blog. And though he’s managed this far without it, maybe he’ll give you a call when he needs your expert advice and mad writing skills. Fingers crossed!

  38. What’s with all the references to his ‘whiteness’? Would he be more palatable if he were a swarthy warrior for freedom?

    PS- omg wot if hitler won teh war and we were forced to listen to classical muzik and be vegetarians???!!!!

  39. are you fucking brain damaged? that was the biggest load of shit that i have ever read. you clearly know nothing. you write like a complete retard! “ass-ange” are you 6 years old?

    go back to remedial school and fucking your cousin you stupid yankee twat

      1. @Wyrd,

        and thats the best reply you can come up with? pathetic. youre as retarded as the writer of this blog, congratulations

          1. @Lanna, other than it seems to have been written by a 5 year old? seriously, all the swearing, calling assange “princess ass-ange” and the mass use of the word “douche bag” doesn’t make you “cool” or “hip” it just makes it look like it has been written by a child. there is no credibility in this blog, it is just random assortments of low iq opinions, swearing and god awful writing ability. stop wasting your time writing this crap and do something useful.

            1. @x,

              Other than the writing style, what makes you think the opinions voiced here show low IQ?

            2. @Lanna

              the proof is in the pudding. have you read this blog? any kid in a remedial class can churn out this garbage. the blog writer is all “oh yes i support freedom of speech and information” yet declares that he believes some things should be held back from the public eye. so yeah, everything bad that governments do should be hidden from us, but only the nice and safe stuff they want us to hear should be allowed through? it saddens me how misguided the blog writer is. i cant believe that you can even take him seriously with his writings (which is hilarious as he writes that he cant take julian seriously) im sorry, but nothing SD does and his opinions on the matter do not aid whistle blowers. at least wikileaks helps get information out to the public domain, which is alot more than this waste of space has ever done. if salty droid is such a fanatic about free speech, why is he slating an organisation that facilitates it? also, since when were wars about mass loss of life? wars are about fighting for a belief, not who can kill the most people, but clearly this ideology bypasses america compeletely (2 nuclear bombs can never be justified) so what if america would have lost X amount of combatants trying to take japan? it would have been the lives of combatants that were lost, not x amount of civilians, let alone those who have been affected by radiation since. “lets take the easy way out and nuke a load of unsuspecting civilians! show them who the big boys are!” pathetic, just pathetic. grow up, stop writing this shit, do something useful with your life, get educated and stop being jealous of julian (because clearly by how much you rant and rave about him in this blog, you really are jealous and probably have a soft spot for him(princess assange? ok if dressing men up as women is your thing, i wont judge you salty!) its okay to be jealous, everyone is guilty of jealousy)

              have a nice day, i feel i have lost iq points by reading the pathetic rants of this child, i really feel i have been reading something from the beano

            3. @x,

              So… you haven’t actually read anything besides this one article, I’m guessing? Or–if you have, you haven’t read anything out side of the anti-wikileaks vein?

              When you were hastily skimming this article with your pre-conceived and prejudiced opinion dead set against anyone that dare question the coolness of Assange, did you happen to stumble over this?

              WikiLeaks is not a neutral conduit finally facilitating the freedom of raw data {which would be very interesting} :: it’s just one of the tens of thousands of outlets editorializing the world through its own skewed perspective {not particularly interesting}. Long term :: it will be exactly as valuable as the organization and people doing the editorializing.

              I also point out this article was published 14th of December 2010. In the past three years, what has Wikileaks done for us? (That question’s not rhetorical. If you have examples of awesome truths sprung out of Wikileaks, please let me know. I’m honestly curious.)

              I’m really tempted to not even bother with you. Because I think the guy that runs this site–the guy the Verge interviewed–that does all this actually important anti-scam reporting and activism on the Internet does not in any sense of the word need you to like him.

              Still, I’m just a Pollyanna optimist is all. I’d like to believe that you could come here and rant a bit. Then calm down and really take it all in and maybe eventually come away knowing more than you did when you got here.

              It’s not likely though, of course. It’s so much easier to just do the close-minded cognitive dissonance thing and yell and scream at the page over fairly trivial points of style. That way you won’t have to try critically thinking about the content.

              It’s your choice, @x.

              Furry cows moo and decompress.

  40. This is how it works..

    Jason Jones, that kid from Utah who moved to Chicago (After a failure of a first 30+ years of his life) writes some incredibly annoying but artistic content, smearing the colors together so that they become BROWN.

    People get pissed off, comment on his blog, making for angry, but somewhat intelligent discussion.

    Lanna, Wyrd, Cosmic Connie, Jack, Random Stuff, and like two other incredibly important people (Mostly Wyrd and Jack) fight back and keep it going.

    Is this pathetic group of people Jason Jones’ lost mormon family from Ogden or something?

    I mean I’m not a Jason Jones expert or anything but I think the sheer strangeness of his character and opinions beg the question.. is this guy who he says he is and working for our best interests?

    Well, back to the wikileaks article. Jason Jones first compared Julian Assange, the founder of the website Weakileaks to Rasputin, probably best explained as “the faith healer of the 1915 Russian Government.”

    Rasputin was basically a monk who because he had helped cure the Tsar’s son, The Tsar did whatever Rasputin said to do.

    The country went downhill, similar to our country being advised by big Pharma, Big Defense, Big Oil, etc.

    Sure Rasputin was one of these “creepy faith healer posers” but you compared Assange to him? LOL Are you a total nutcase?

    And I am in now way defending Julian Assange as I don;t even like him. This is an issue I take up with Jones since he chooses to DIVERT.

    But then we fall into a propagandistic, contradictory and borderline retarded combination of opinions, obviously written by an incredibly psychotic individual.

    One of which is incredibly revealing of who Jason Jones is.

    Jones objects to Assange’s use of the video showing our guys killing everyone under the sun and then spends his time defending our guys.

    Then, admits he does not know what murder means.

    He shouts loudly: Fuck you! (Julian Assange) “You patsy nobody” because Assange condemned the actions displayed in the video.

    It naturally BEGS to ask Jason to understand.. We murdered those people.

    See, Jason really wants you to spend time discussing if shooting a crowd of innocent people is murder or not.

    What type of “humanitarian” or “libertarian” speaks like this.

    Heck, I think killing an armed intruder is self defense. Im not as liberal as you think.

    And if that video was taken in our country after we had been invaded, perhaps that discussion would be acceptable.

    But there is one thing Jones’ figured no one would notice.

    THAT VIDEO WAS TAKEN IN IRAQ!! Are you insane?

    Yes Jones, it’s murder. Are you letting your religion confuse you again?

    It is not ok for a group of defense corporations to invade another country.

    But then, yes you guessed it; He condemns Assange’s tweet announcing he raised money.

    When you are spending money, you need to make money.

    That’s why we put banners on our sites that sell products like water filters, books, yes.. those evil books that aren’t really just books.. they are “gateway drugs” to an intellectual dimention of {something bad, not sure} Oh that’s right; The most extreme example that happened like two times and represents 0.05% of the entire situation.

    Meanwhile, I’ll defend things that actually do more harm to 90% of the population.

    That’s right. Im a _____________

    Caught in your little prison Jason? Decisions.. Decisions.. Should I ask for donations? Ah but I’ll lose the couple people who have my side.

    But that fucker Ass-ange gets to raise $150k!!

    Yeah because some people do real work and obtain documents from the ones that do real wrong.

    And they aren’t telemarketing documents you pathetic mess.

    Oh, are you upset that you adopted the same model accepting anonymous sources but no one ever sends you anything? That’s right. You are bombarded by the fans of the authors you demonize and it has driven you crazy.

    Your worst fear is that all of your work the past 4 years will be for nothing.

    You are like a government experiment that doesn’t really work. Did they drop your funding in 2012 and that’s why you disappeared?

    It would make sense as you damn the FTC for not “regulating enough”

    What type of libertarian activist pushes for more government power? I think they do a fine job actually. They are the one government entity that has sued some of these big corporations “too big to fail.”

    In a nutshell Jones, when our troops kill innocent civilians, they may not be committing murder themselves, but someone is.

    Yes there is a difference between pre-meditated murder and a “mistake” but Iraq was no mistake.

    And may possibly be one of the most terrible things for us ever to see. You inadvertently excused the mass murder of 100,000+ people in their own country by writing this article.

    YES, you did. If you don’t want to fall in the category of promoting FASCISM and being “mistaken” for an advocate of big government, then stick to the right side of the fence and stop trying to reach across the isle (Or maybe your already on that other side of the isle) attempting to make yourself look rational.

    And you would rather talk about how Julian should take the blame?

    Your gig is up.

    Grow up.

    Because when you are my age, if you are still alive you might find out you were on the wrong side of the fence and you have no one.

    P.S: Wyrd.. The Verge interviewed him and no one liked it. Who cares. Have we seen a sequel? Hell no. And don’t plan on it considering his first page search results either. I wouldn’t want those search results! LOL

    1. @Balls, Hello Mr. Balls, I think maybe Salty probably wasn’t like you were saying “pushing for more government power.” I think maybe he just doesn’t want Mr. Julian Assange to send another big “to do list” of names to the terrorists. And also it isn’t fair that he gets free rent in the Ecuador Embassy and everyone else has to pay their own rent and not even get to live in any Embassy.

    2. @Balls,

      If the gig was up, your comment would have been redundant, and, better for the world, you would not have bothered to make it.

      I, though believing SD is a force for good, was initially taken aback by the above post. The WikiLeaks video of the helicopter gun ship shooting up unarmed men was one of the most distressing things I have seen (you might find my initial comment above somewhere).

      I since learnt that the bit of video showing the guy kneeling down with the RPG was initially edited out by WikiLeaks – not sure if it was at a later date re-included, or whatever, but I subsequently saw the un-editied version, and it makes a difference; but war is still horror.

      If WikiLeaks / Julian Assange was respectable, they would not have seen fit to edit out the bit of film showing the guy kneeling down with the RPG.

      Releasing the film of what looks like a trigger happy American gunship shooting up seemingly unarmed men, and then still shooting them up as they crawl along the dust, but deliberately editing out the mitigating factors, resulted in more Iraqis and Americans dying: not something to thank Wikileaks for; regardless of the excuse or lack of excuse for the horror of the event.

      Also: my re-looking at the details of the rape charges – Assange comes across as a sleazy unpleasant man who abused women, rather than an innocent victim of manipulative predatory women.

      Re your not very useful comments about the second world war… I can recommend you read A History of Bombing by Sven Lindquist, and Nemesis by Max Hastings – to get a more balanced perspective. Re Iraq – there is no connection between this blog, and the decision to go to war there, and no inference to be drawn as to who supported or was against that war.

      In fact your rambling comment about not really associated random bits of information does not add much value to the discussion.

      I am just trying to think of how you might better spend your time.

      Perhaps you could become an Internet Marketer? You could write/borrow/or steal an Info product, do some rambling infomercials… aha – I see some similarities – maybe that’s what you already do!

  41. The Daily Beast again. They keep writing stuff about Assange and I keep clicking on it. I guess that’s how marketing works in the real world. Anyway…

    Exclusive: Former WikiLeaks Employee James Ball Describes Working With Julian Assange

    The way I read it, the bulk of the article kind of rips Assange a new one. Towards the end of the middle, James Ball writes

    By January, the situation had changed. With me and others concerned about what we saw as ethical lapses left, right, and center, Assange produced a new NDA [Non-Disclosure Agreement], silencing anyone who signed it for a full decade against saying a word about WikiLeaks activities, on the pain of millions of dollars of penalties.

    Faced with the bizarre situation of being asked to sign a gag order by a whistleblowing organization, I, alone, refused. Encouraged by Julian (I later learned), WikiLeaks staffers kept me up until 3 a.m. pressuring me to sign. Early the next morning, I awoke with Assange sat on my bed, pressuring me to sign—even before I was dressed. I held out, eventually left our remote location, and didn’t go back.

    But then he comes back with

    Assange isn’t entirely venal. His problem is “noble cause” corruption: behavior he’d rightly condemn in others, he excuses in himself, because he believes, at his core, he is the good guy.

    Myself, I’m reminded of the conclusion of George Orwell’s Animal Farm: Julian Assange has become everything he originally, rightly, despised.

    Perhaps. Or perhaps his problem is that he was always one corrupt mofo and Wikileaks gave him the opportunity to make stuff happen.

    Furry cows moo and decompress.

  42. Wikileaks claims their legal team is helping Edward Snowden obtain asylum, and Julian Assange can’t stop inserting his grubby little self and comparing himself to Snowden.Blow-by-blow here.

Comments are closed.