Trump Terrorist gets three and a half years

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
They never release any info that would or could endanger lives.
rubbish., they released thousands of documents often without even knowing what was in them. According to Assange there was to much for them to sift through, afterall, he only had 4 staff.

here is an extract from wiki about some of the crap assange released


WikiLeaks has published individuals' Social Security numbers, medical information, and credit card numbers.[41] An analysis by the Associated Press found that WikiLeaks had in one of its mass-disclosures published "the personal information of hundreds of people – including sick children, rape victims and mental health patients".[41] WikiLeaks has named teenage rape victims, and outed an individual arrested for homosexuality in Saudi Arabia.[41] Some of WikiLeaks' cables "described patients with psychiatric conditions, seriously ill children or refugees".[41] An analysis of WikiLeaks' Saudi cables "turned up more than 500 passport, identity, academic or employment files ... three dozen records pertaining to family issues in the cables – including messages about marriages, divorces, missing children, elopements and custody battles. Many are very personal, like the marital certificates that proclaims whether the bride was a virgin. Others deal with Saudis who are deeply in debt, including one man who says his wife stole his money. One divorce document details a male partner's infertility. Others identify the partners of women suffering from sexually transmitted diseases including HIV and Hepatitis C."[41] Two individuals named in the DNC leaks were targeted by identity thieves following WikiLeaks' release of their Social Security and credit card information.[41] In its leak of DNC e-mails, WikiLeaks revealed the details of an ordinary staffer's suicide attempt and brought attention to it through a tweet.[359][360]
that was your heros doing.

He is SCUM
 

chris155au

Active member
yes, I was going to mention it but thought you might appreciate sounding like you had a clue :ROFL1 :ROFL1
Actually, I didn't read what you said, I just did a word search for a couple of words and matched it to one of your posts. So I was deeply worried that your very likely stupid words were attributed to me.
 

Crackey

New member
he published those files to make himself famous,. He traded top secret info to build up his fame. .....
Does that apply to all journalists?
He released thousands of files without even knowing what was in them beforehand.
That's a lie for sure. Wikileaks scrutinizes all incoming info, sift through it and establish its credibility by accredited professionals. As far as the danger it might cause I've already addressed that, so ..... you are being dishonest by feigning ignorance.
Like I said, any real crime he had other avenues to seek justice. Instead he released tens of thousands of files that didn't reveal any crimes but instead revealed what diplomats thought of their opponents behind closed doors, or what A said about B at this party.

He was a gossip monger like 'woman's day' or 'New Idea' or any of the other gossip magazines out there. That he inadvertently revealed crimes was a fluke. He released thousands of files without even knowing what was in them beforehand. He also revealed the identities of informants and sources behind 'enemy' lines. It was reckless and endangered the lives of people whilst also undoing years of diplomacy.

In the end, he wasn't interested in righting wrongs, that was just his excuse to justify his behavior, he was only interested in building up his fame.
You contribute absolutely nothing to back up your accusations. Not even a motivated guess. You're much too tedious now.
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
Actually, I didn't read what you said, I just did a word search for a couple of words and matched it to one of your posts. So I was deeply worried that your very likely stupid words were attributed to me.
see, thats a great example of why you're better off pretending my quotes are yours
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
Does that apply to all journalists?

That's a lie for sure. Wikileaks scrutinizes all incoming info, sift through it and establish its credibility by accredited professionals. As far as the danger it might cause I've already addressed that, so ..... you are being dishonest by feigning ignorance.

You contribute absolutely nothing to back up your accusations. Not even a motivated guess. You're much too tedious now.

your white flag is accepted
 

Crackey

New member
to busy running away to wave the white flag ehh ... my mistake
I never run away from a confrontation but if I'm dealing with an idiot I do walk away. That you are able to just barely see my backside in the far distance is because of the fact that I knew you were an idiot quite some time ago - but at this distance right now I must at any rate praise you for your excellent hearing range. :poketongue
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
I never run away from a confrontation but if I'm dealing with an idiot I do walk away. That you are able to just barely see my backside in the far distance is because of the fact that I knew you were an idiot quite some time ago - but at this distance right now I must at any rate praise you for your excellent hearing range. :poketongue

you were running. Own it.
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
Whether I am running or walking your response just now proves that you have nothing to contribute so you are standing there alone and stagnant with a stupid look on your face.

View attachment 1081

the funny part is that you think that in a discussion about you running or not, you actually believe there is something to contribute :ROFL1:ROFL1
 
Top