A neat piece of propaganda engineering there--to turn a whistle-blowing website that exposes what is being done secretly 'in our name' and paid for by our taxes into an issue of whether a website operator gained consent or not for condom use.

And people are buying it.

What concerns me is that each year the UK Border Agency cannot be bothered to deport the thousands of illegal immigrants who are known to be convicted murderers, rapists etc and leaves them free to murder and rape at will again ---but moves the entire legal and security apparatus of the state against one website owner who may or may not have sought consent on condom use in another country.



You missed a great wiki page, Lord Haw Haw, on your namesake who was hanged for treason after working as a Nazi propagandist.
It makes so much better reading than the Sun, Daily Mail or News of the World.
Oops, forgot.
The News of the World had to close its multi-million pound business overnight recently when it ran into its own problems with illegal activities and tampering with the truth. The inquiry is ongoing and will see off a few more of the untruthful tabloids yet, I think.

And the Swedish woman victim, BTW, is rumoured to have CIA links.


What price validity if you never investigate or question it?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/24/2011 02:22AM by Stoic.

As well, wikileaks is not just about Assange, there are many others involved in providing whistleblowing.

And whether or not someone used a condom, is obviously a separate issue from releasing information about cults, or general whistleblowing.

Besides, its a classic smear tactic.
If they can't get a whistleblower on the central issue, they try to get them on something else.
Maybe its true, or maybe someone was paid off with a brown envelope to create a smear.


Keeping the focus on cults and wikileaks, wikileaks must exist for things like cults. Otherwise, will target, smear, attack, threaten, and even possibly 'eliminate' insiders who are whistleblowers against the cult.

There needs to always be some type of Wikileaks to release information about cults, as well as to expose corruption of the governments and corporations.


And Lord Haw Haw was a Nazi propagandist.

Stoic advised:

Quote

What concerns me is that each year the UK Border Agency cannot be bothered to deport the thousands of illegal immigrants who are known to be convicted murderers, rapists etc and leaves them free to murder and rape at will again ---but moves the entire legal and security apparatus of the state against one website owner who may or may not have sought consent on condom use in another country

That is a world wide issue, that our politicans and senators do not really want to touch. I agree with you 100% on this point, but factions in the Socialist parties and communit parties protest for these people to stay within the country.

Quote

You missed a great wiki page, Lord Haw Haw, on your namesake who was hanged for treason after working as a Nazi propagandist.
It makes so much better reading than the Sun, Daily Mail or News of the World.
Oops, forgot.
The News of the World had to close its multi-million pound business overnight recently when it ran into its own problems with illegal activities and tampering with the truth. The inquiry is ongoing and will see off a few more of the untruthful tabloids yet, I think.

I am not a big fan of trash magainzes, and newspapers, that mix news stories with cheap entertainment.

Quote

And the Swedish woman victim, BTW, is rumoured to have CIA links.

Rumours are ust idle gossip with no substance, and that comment shows where you are coming from, by throwing the victim under the car, for somebody you appear to admire.


The Anti-Cult:

I agree websites like these are needed to expose the truths that cults are doing around the world and to their members. But it needs be carefully fact checked. Cant just have one person coming into a forum, slamming a group, just due to the fact they did not agree with it, and their is no other evidence that they prouduce that the group in question is harmful. It happens far too much, people do not care if its libel, they just have their own issue and do not look at the bigger picture.

I could example would be someone with say pro-choice belief attenting a church with pro-life beliefs. They should not be able to run to a site labelling a church a cult, just because they differed on that issue. If the group is not harmful, they should not be thrown to the wolves, for the sake of one person who just needsto toughen up.

In cases of dangerous groups that is an entirely different matter.

It's not about "not using a condom." It's about forcing yourself on someone, also known as rape. I'm sick of all these liberal men who think women are less than nothing and crimes against us are trivial. Like the women raped at the Occupy Protests being told not to report being raped because there are more important issues than stupid little females. What about our rights to freedom, to bodily integrity. That's a "side issue."

"And the Swedish woman victim, BTW, is rumoured to have CIA links."

Anything to back up this assertion? Rumoured? Where is your proof. Talk about propoganda.

You are just a long line of rally-round-the-rapist enablers. Like all the Hollywood assholes supporting Roman Polanski and the idiot football fans at Penn State who care more about sports than the violation of children. Just because you think Wikileaks is important doesn't make violating a woman ok. Or does it to you?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/24/2011 10:33AM by Penelope.

Oh come on. To leap to a false conclusion about condoning of rape, is of course ridiculous.

Just to clarify, of course if anyone rapes someone, or is convicted of rape, then they need to be prosecuted and jailed for that terrible crime.

If Assange committed rape, he needs to be prosecuted for that.
If its a false allegation for personal or political reasons, then the person doing that needs to be prosecuted.

[www.msnbc.msn.com]
[www.dailymail.co.uk]

But this alleged rape, is separate from the concept of Wikileaks, which is a number of people working together.
Wikileaks needs to continue no matter the outcome of these cases.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/24/2011 11:12AM by The Anticult.

[www.dailymail.co.uk]

I am in total agreement--this thread is about the Wikileaks website and the campaign to close it down, not about one man's sexual behaviour.
If Assange has raped anyone then I want him tried and prosecuted for that.

So far it is an allegation by one woman--not of rape, as she admits that she consented to sex--but that he did not use a condom during it.
There was a similar allegation from a second woman that appears not to have been pursued.
Assange has not yet been questioned about either of these allegations, as the Swedish prosecutors do not seem as keen to question him --despite his willingness to be questioned--as to allow speculative stories about it to spread.

This is known as a distraction from the real issue in propaganda circles. The world's attention is directed to the salacious news which evokes a satisfying emotional response of outrage in the reader--while the real work of burying the real story --shutting down the whistle-blower---is done.

A classic piece of misdirection.

This thread isn't the place for propaganda misdirections such as Haw Haw is attempting--neither is it the place for expressions of emotional outrage over the general heinousness of rape. It is about the deliberate confusion of the audience to distract from the silencing of a whistle-blowing website.

This has already been covered earlier in the thread for anyone who cares to do their homework.

I am not trying to twist the conversation,that Stoic is trying to cunningly imply.

The title of the thread is Wiki leaks-Free Assange,is it not?

Stoic is trying to say its about stopping the closure of wiki leaks, and suggesting penelope and my comments are not welcome.

Change the title thread as not to confuse people.
In regards to the closure,unlike Stoic I welcome it. Why anyone would want a site that endangers military personnel to remain open is beyond me.

Either close it,or heavily edit it,so only certain information is revealed.

Lord Haw Haw:

You seem to be trolling here.

You should start another thread to discuss what's wrong with Wikileaks and Assange.