Julian Assange Walks Out of CNN Interview

Initiate
Posts: 554
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 9:32 am

PostSun Oct 24, 2010 4:33 am » by Simpletruths10


There are many more important things she could have asked him, like when is he going to release the password to the insurance file.

Instead she attacks him with rape allegations, which are false, because the allegations will eventually be dropped.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 1068
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:38 am
Location: Ontario, Canada

PostSun Oct 24, 2010 4:53 am » by Tinman4higher


You Have The Right To Remain Silent.
But We Hope You Won't.

http://www.puppetgov.com



Upload to Disclose.tv

Atheism is a non-prophet organization...GC

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 3766
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:58 am

PostSun Oct 24, 2010 5:04 am » by Megame23


She is questioning a man she believes is corrupt, on something that she has clearly done some investigation into.

This is exactly what we need from investigative journalism, if she was asking questions like this to Bush I bet you would have a different view on her journalistic style.

"Mr. Bush, I have met with someone in your administration who said he quit because you are a psychopath, do you have any comment?"

"No thats really not interesting, i'm here for blah blah blah..."


At the end the bastard Asssange pulled some fake tears and talked about how she was attacking him while he was there for the lives of the dead. Fuck that, he is corrupt, and she was doing her duty to figure it out.



Its just that this time the blah blah blah has to do with something we care about. But it is being twisted and given to us by corrupt scum.
Last edited by Megame23 on Sun Oct 24, 2010 5:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." ~Edmund Burke

Conspirator
Posts: 1729
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:14 am

PostSun Oct 24, 2010 5:06 am » by Hackjames


godsofatlantis wrote:It looked staged to me, and not natural. He didn't look that pissed off at all, it just looked like someone told him to do it.

Not buying it.


I don't think I've ever seen him look pissed off, what does that have to do with anything? And what are you saying was staged, his exit? I think he exited for real.

Who told him to leave? Why? Was it a blanket statement ("just leave at some point") or specific advice in relation to the questioning ("if they bring up the rape thing, book it")?
This is your world. You're the creator.
-Bob Motherfucking Ross

Conspirator
Posts: 1729
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:14 am

PostSun Oct 24, 2010 5:08 am » by Hackjames


megame23 wrote:She is questioning a man she believes is corrupt, on something that she has clearly done some investigation into.

This is exactly what we need from investigative journalism, if she was asking questions like this to Bush I bet you would have a different view on her journalistic style.

"Mr. Bush, I have met with someone in your administration who said he quit because you are a psychopath, do you have any comment?"

"No thats really not interesting, i'm here for blah blah blah..."



Its just that this time the blah blah blah has to do with something we care about. But it is being twisted and given to us by corrupt scum.



If you say so. I'll point out that you assume a whole lot, though. I certainly wouldn't say what you're claiming is "clear", but I'm guessing that's just because I'm ignorant of something you're not?
This is your world. You're the creator.
-Bob Motherfucking Ross

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 3766
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:58 am

PostSun Oct 24, 2010 5:11 am » by Megame23


hackjames wrote:
megame23 wrote:She is questioning a man she believes is corrupt, on something that she has clearly done some investigation into.

This is exactly what we need from investigative journalism, if she was asking questions like this to Bush I bet you would have a different view on her journalistic style.

"Mr. Bush, I have met with someone in your administration who said he quit because you are a psychopath, do you have any comment?"

"No thats really not interesting, i'm here for blah blah blah..."



Its just that this time the blah blah blah has to do with something we care about. But it is being twisted and given to us by corrupt scum.



If you say so. I'll point out that you assume a whole lot, though. I certainly wouldn't say what you're claiming is "clear", but I'm guessing that's just because I'm ignorant of something you're not?


not calling anyone ignorant, but just look at what Julian has said. 9/11 isn't an inside job, bilderberg isn't anything to worry about. what happened from the last leaks? nothing but Pakistan looks bad now, and is more open to becoming an American target.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." ~Edmund Burke

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 3766
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:58 am

PostSun Oct 24, 2010 5:15 am » by Megame23


another thing,

this guy goes all around the world gathering top secret info and "exposing" it, this information is top secret, they have every reason to try and silence him. it really wouldn't be hard, seeing as how many news interviews the guy does.

They haven't because they dont want to stop him, they want to use him.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." ~Edmund Burke

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 9092
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 7:03 pm
Location: Inside You.

PostSun Oct 24, 2010 5:20 am » by Troll2rocks


Well if I were paranoid I would say it is a blatant smear campaign, created to rally the public against him. It's a tactic used by politicians and campaign runners to gain credibility and destroy oposition. I would be willing to bet the rape charge is a publicity guru who hired a girl paid or made a backdoor deal for said girl to make a bogus story upon the person in question. It is an old trick that is still rife all over the world but non more so than the uk and America.

Do not believe it, there is a concerted effort in place to destroy both publicly and privately this man and the important work his website is doing. At all costs. I don't think people fully grasp the full implications of just how much is at stake if wikileaks went public with all information especially unedited.


Smear campaign, and CNN well they report the way they are told to.

It is very much like the running of a presidential campaign where both partiesmattack one another until someone loses, however politicians have an advantage, they no how the game works, unfortunately when done upon private citizens it has a much more devastating affect.

My movemnow would be simple, leak everything unedited. Because the people this pressure comes from are the very people who are going to be most affected.

I would also rename the insurance file to... Now your really fucked!


There is a silver lining to this cloud, and that is this.... These tactics only ever usually get used as a last resort. So I would say the powers that be are really backed into a corner, even if this guy was to drop dead from natural causes now, the people would smell a rat; so assassination is out of the question. They are going to do all they can to smear and destroy any chance of the info being looked at through calm rational eyes, because it's coming out regardless. Even if th pentagon has issued orders to all major networks and press not to report info leaked, I imagine the nature of the insurance file will render that void due to how bad it is.


Just you wait and see
Last edited by Troll2rocks on Sun Oct 24, 2010 5:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Censorship debunking & disinformation, it's all in a days work.

Conspirator
Posts: 1729
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:14 am

PostSun Oct 24, 2010 5:20 am » by Hackjames


megame23 wrote:not calling anyone ignorant, but just look at what Julian has said. 9/11 isn't an inside job, bilderberg isn't anything to worry about. what happened from the last leaks? nothing but Pakistan looks bad now, and is more open to becoming an American target.


Fair enough, on ignorance.

On 9/11 (and it's my suspicion that this happens a lot), I believe he may well not hold that view personally, but has decided (given a general lack of public acceptance that I assume we can all agree exists) to represent wikileaks by personally disavowing that there was any conspiracy (in order to "reach more people" with the information they actually have).

I personally agree with him on the point that bilderberg isn't anything to worry about, but notice that it doesn't condone their existence or activities.

Your summary on the outcome of wikileaks activities so far seems very simplistic and unsubstantiated. I can think of many sources (mainstream and otherwise) who disagree thoroughly.
This is your world. You're the creator.
-Bob Motherfucking Ross

Conspirator
Posts: 1729
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:14 am

PostSun Oct 24, 2010 5:22 am » by Hackjames


megame23 wrote:this guy goes all around the world gathering top secret info and "exposing" it


See, that statement alone makes it hard to take you seriously. The above is a gross misunderstanding of how wikileaks works and what Assange's role in it is.
This is your world. You're the creator.
-Bob Motherfucking Ross


PreviousNext

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook