The Real Truth About The Fraud Called "Wikileaks"

[Fuck NWO]

"Friday, September 28, 2012"

 "I still remember over two years ago when there was a great stirring in both the Jewish controlled mainstream media, and the alternative media, about documents that were suddenly appearing through a group headed by a man called Julian Assange, called "Wikileaks".   Everyone was suddenly reading the "Wikileaks" reports and some were falsely claiming them to be genuine.  I on the other hand labelled "Wikileaks" instantly as an Israeli operation most probably run through their Mossad as just another form of disinformation to poison the alternative media and the so called truth movement...

Now, I want to present a very interesting article through the PressTV website at www.presstv.ir, written by Gordon Duff that shows clear evidence that "Wikileaks" is indeed a fraud, and its major player, Julian Assange himself is and always was a Mossad agent!   I have that important article right here for everyone to see for themselves, and of course my own comments and thoughts to follow:"

See more: http://northerntruthseeker.blogspot.gr/2012/09/the-real-truth-about-fraud-called.html

[1715153358]

1715153358

[1715153358]

1715153358

[1715153358]

1715153358

[1715153358]

1715153358

[TECSHARE]

I have been telling people this for a while (that Wikileaks was an op). I remember when it first appeared, day one I was there looking at it way before anyone knew what the hell it was. It was filled with documents that were open secrets. I mean by this they were sensitive materials, but none of it was actually secret because it had already been previously leaked to the public from some other source. This instantly made me suspicious that it was a honeypot designed to see who went there for information so they could be looked into in more detail.

Soon after Paypal, Visa, and Mastercard cut off donations to Wikileaks, then "Anonymous" got involved with a series of high profile hacks that accomplished nothing but making hackers look dangerous providing pretext for legislation to crack down on the internet. Remember this is also around the time they were trying to push the SOPA legislation. The real kicker is the media put this on blast for about 6 months straight, and the media never covers information unless those in control want you to see it. If they make a mistake and cover the wrong story it disappears along with the jobs of whoever published it. This demonstrated to me very clearly that Wikileaks/Anonymous were part of an op, not any kind of true resistance. If they were legitimate resistance they would have been blacked out in the media, not covered consistently for months.

Then of course there was Occupy which had heavy Anonymous involvement, Lulzsec, and after that Snowden. In my opinion Snowden was following orders when he did what he did.  Again, just like in the Wikileaks case, the media was all over this covering it for months and months.  Not only again did he provide more pretext for internet crackdown, he caused a serious blow to the US tech sector as international companies dumped US products and services in favor of what they saw as more trustworthy sources. This was also right in the middle of the call by many nations to give more international control of the internet. In addition this put everyone globally on the same page letting them know Uncle Sam is watching them, providing a chill effect. Then he went to Russia as a nice cherry on top to make the Russians look like the bad guys and give the US pretext for creating more pressure on Russia in preparation for the Ukraine invasion that was soon to follow.

In short this accomplished many of the goals of the globalist agenda, weakening the US economy in order to provide an international power vacuum from its collapse, providing a push for international control of the net, creating hysteria over hackers justifying totalitarian internet legislation, demonizing Russia by sending Snowden there, and also putting the world on notice that they are being watched to create a massive chill effect. This is just the strategy of sockpuppeting extended into real life and at a much larger scale. Also in the end, the world now has a hero figure to worship that they can use to control the opposition and use as an outlet for disinformation at any time.

[jeannemadrigal2]

Interesting ideas, but some of the information leaked caused serious harm to the usa.  I don't think that they would have leaked things like the iraq war video of shooting civilians, and some other things.  But still you make some interesting points.

[TECSHARE]

Interesting ideas, but some of the information leaked caused serious harm to the usa.  I don't think that they would have leaked things like the iraq war video of shooting civilians, and some other things.  But still you make some interesting points.

As I stated a lot of these goals are globalist in nature. There are globalists within the USA government that put internationalism first and USA second (if it is a priority at all). As I explained the ultimate goal is to implode the USA to create a power vacuum in order to allow an international system of government to rise to power.

It will be nothing more than yet another unaccountable layer of government almost completely untouchable, above national sovereignty, putting the entire globe under the control of a handful of individuals. They are already setting up an international system of laws, banking, taxes, and treaties like the TPP will provide them with the removal of national sovereignty. In the end that temporary harm caused got them massive media attention anyway, so in the grand scheme of things even if they cared about the USA, it was a small price to pay for all of those benefits.

[jaysabi]

The question that always begs to be asked is "why?" If you can provide a compelling reason why the shadowy "gloablists" want to create one world government (and I haven't seen one that stands up to more than 10 seconds of scrutiny), then you have to deal with the far more troublesome issue of "how?" We don't even have a single political party that can dominate American politics, what makes you think that "globalists" inside the government can not only manipulate ours so purposefully (where political parties that actively and openly try regularly fail), but also every major government on Earth to derive the desired result of an international government? Europe can't even rule the Eurozone without nationalist tension, the idea that "globalists" can overcome that, plus politically conquer America, and then overcome nationalist tendencies in the rest of the world seems extremely unlikely, to put it politely. Even acknowledging it as a possibility gives the idea far more credit than it deserves.

[TECSHARE]

The question that always begs to be asked is "why?" If you can provide a compelling reason why the shadowy "gloablists" want to create one world government (and I haven't seen one that stands up to more than 10 seconds of scrutiny), then you have to deal with the far more troublesome issue of "how?" We don't even have a single political party that can dominate American politics, what makes you think that "globalists" inside the government can not only manipulate ours so purposefully (where political parties that actively and openly try regularly fail), but also every major government on Earth to derive the desired result of an international government? Europe can't even rule the Eurozone without nationalist tension, the idea that "globalists" can overcome that, plus politically conquer America, and then overcome nationalist tendencies in the rest of the world seems extremely unlikely, to put it politely. Even acknowledging it as a possibility gives the idea far more credit than it deserves.

Now why would criminal cartels want the ability to supersede national law and have power over the whole globe via controlling a small handful of people at the top? Gee, let me think... These entities infect nations and other centralized organizations like a parasite infects a host, using it until it dies just to jump to another. I already explained most of this and gave examples, but you were too busy trying hard to acknowledge the possibility you must have missed it.

They don't have to convince anyone any more than the mafia has to convince organizations to do what they want. They have no loyalties to any nation or peoples. Globalism is by no means a new idea, and has been the goal of many dictators as well as other powerful and well known individuals for several generations. This plan has been in the works for a very long time and has been discussed by many high ranking figures representing various national governments in public. Frankly I find it inevitable with a world filled with so much reckless pursuit of power and control at any cost, and many in power agree. They are just fighting to be the ones holding the reins now.

It is unfortunate you haven't spent the time to educate yourself on world events leading up to this point, because I am not sure I can provide you with a full history course via the forum. Sorry I just don't have the time to make up for your lack of education. Additionally I don't owe you an explanation, nor do I give a shit if you believe any of it. I am here to have a discussion, not to butt heads with people acting disingenuously with a veil of false sincerity asking questions just so they can then attempt to deconstruct every word and minute detail in order to fall back upon the ignorant bliss of their confirmation bias. You believe whatever you want. I am discussing this so that people have an opportunity to consider this for themselves, not to convince anyone.

[jaysabi]

The question that always begs to be asked is "why?" If you can provide a compelling reason why the shadowy "gloablists" want to create one world government (and I haven't seen one that stands up to more than 10 seconds of scrutiny), then you have to deal with the far more troublesome issue of "how?" We don't even have a single political party that can dominate American politics, what makes you think that "globalists" inside the government can not only manipulate ours so purposefully (where political parties that actively and openly try regularly fail), but also every major government on Earth to derive the desired result of an international government? Europe can't even rule the Eurozone without nationalist tension, the idea that "globalists" can overcome that, plus politically conquer America, and then overcome nationalist tendencies in the rest of the world seems extremely unlikely, to put it politely. Even acknowledging it as a possibility gives the idea far more credit than it deserves.

Now why would criminal cartels want the ability to supersede national law and have power over the whole globe via controlling a small handful of people at the top? Gee, let me think... These entities infect nations and other centralized organizations like a parasite infects a host, using it until it dies just to jump to another. I already explained most of this and gave examples, but you were too busy trying hard to acknowledge the possibility you must have missed it.

They don't have to convince anyone any more than the mafia has to convince organizations to do what they want. They have no loyalties to any nation or peoples. Globalism is by no means a new idea, and has been the goal of many dictators as well as other powerful and well known individuals for several generations. This plan has been in the works for a very long time and has been discussed by many high ranking figures representing various national governments in public. Frankly I find it inevitable with a world filled with so much reckless pursuit of power and control at any cost, and many in power agree. They are just fighting to be the ones holding the reins now.

It is unfortunate you haven't spent the time to educate yourself on world events leading up to this point, because I am not sure I can provide you with a full history course via the forum. Sorry I just don't have the time to make up for your lack of education. Additionally I don't owe you an explanation, nor do I give a shit if you believe any of it. I am here to have a discussion, not to butt heads with people acting disingenuously with a veil of false sincerity asking questions just so they can then attempt to deconstruct every word and minute detail in order to fall back upon the ignorant bliss of their confirmation bias. You believe whatever you want. I am discussing this so that people have an opportunity to consider this for themselves, not to convince anyone.

Well you've provided absolutely nothing of substance in your response except to double down on rhetoric rooted in conspiracy theory and re-reference a bunch of events that are only linked together because you see a pretty vast conspiracy. Re-referencing the material that has not been shown to be cause or evidence of a conspiracy is not an answer to my skepticism, and there's clearly no point asking for any further elucidation, because it clearly is too much of a burden to substantiate your claims to someone who's not already gulping the kool aid, so this is the place where I disembark this particular crazy train.

[TECSHARE]

The question that always begs to be asked is "why?" If you can provide a compelling reason why the shadowy "gloablists" want to create one world government (and I haven't seen one that stands up to more than 10 seconds of scrutiny), then you have to deal with the far more troublesome issue of "how?" We don't even have a single political party that can dominate American politics, what makes you think that "globalists" inside the government can not only manipulate ours so purposefully (where political parties that actively and openly try regularly fail), but also every major government on Earth to derive the desired result of an international government? Europe can't even rule the Eurozone without nationalist tension, the idea that "globalists" can overcome that, plus politically conquer America, and then overcome nationalist tendencies in the rest of the world seems extremely unlikely, to put it politely. Even acknowledging it as a possibility gives the idea far more credit than it deserves.

Now why would criminal cartels want the ability to supersede national law and have power over the whole globe via controlling a small handful of people at the top? Gee, let me think... These entities infect nations and other centralized organizations like a parasite infects a host, using it until it dies just to jump to another. I already explained most of this and gave examples, but you were too busy trying hard to acknowledge the possibility you must have missed it.

They don't have to convince anyone any more than the mafia has to convince organizations to do what they want. They have no loyalties to any nation or peoples. Globalism is by no means a new idea, and has been the goal of many dictators as well as other powerful and well known individuals for several generations. This plan has been in the works for a very long time and has been discussed by many high ranking figures representing various national governments in public. Frankly I find it inevitable with a world filled with so much reckless pursuit of power and control at any cost, and many in power agree. They are just fighting to be the ones holding the reins now.

It is unfortunate you haven't spent the time to educate yourself on world events leading up to this point, because I am not sure I can provide you with a full history course via the forum. Sorry I just don't have the time to make up for your lack of education. Additionally I don't owe you an explanation, nor do I give a shit if you believe any of it. I am here to have a discussion, not to butt heads with people acting disingenuously with a veil of false sincerity asking questions just so they can then attempt to deconstruct every word and minute detail in order to fall back upon the ignorant bliss of their confirmation bias. You believe whatever you want. I am discussing this so that people have an opportunity to consider this for themselves, not to convince anyone.

Well you've provided absolutely nothing of substance in your response except to double down on rhetoric rooted in conspiracy theory and re-reference a bunch of events that are only linked together because you see a pretty vast conspiracy. Re-referencing the material that has not been shown to be cause or evidence of a conspiracy is not an answer to my skepticism, and there's clearly no point asking for any further elucidation, because it clearly is too much of a burden to substantiate your claims to someone who's not already gulping the kool aid, so this is the place where I disembark this particular crazy train.

Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

[TECSHARE]

I have been telling people this for a while (that Wikileaks was an op). I remember when it first appeared, day one I was there looking at it way before anyone knew what the hell it was. It was filled with documents that were open secrets. I mean by this they were sensitive materials, but none of it was actually secret because it had already been previously leaked to the public from some other source. This instantly made me suspicious that it was a honeypot designed to see who went there for information so they could be looked into in more detail.

Soon after Paypal, Visa, and Mastercard cut off donations to Wikileaks, then "Anonymous" got involved with a series of high profile hacks that accomplished nothing but making hackers look dangerous providing pretext for legislation to crack down on the internet. Remember this is also around the time they were trying to push the SOPA legislation. The real kicker is the media put this on blast for about 6 months straight, and the media never covers information unless those in control want you to see it. If they make a mistake and cover the wrong story it disappears along with the jobs of whoever published it. This demonstrated to me very clearly that Wikileaks/Anonymous were part of an op, not any kind of true resistance. If they were legitimate resistance they would have been blacked out in the media, not covered consistently for months.

Then of course there was Occupy which had heavy Anonymous involvement, Lulzsec, and after that Snowden. In my opinion Snowden was following orders when he did what he did.  Again, just like in the Wikileaks case, the media was all over this covering it for months and months.  Not only again did he provide more pretext for internet crackdown, he caused a serious blow to the US tech sector as international companies dumped US products and services in favor of what they saw as more trustworthy sources. This was also right in the middle of the call by many nations to give more international control of the internet. In addition this put everyone globally on the same page letting them know Uncle Sam is watching them, providing a chill effect. Then he went to Russia as a nice cherry on top to make the Russians look like the bad guys and give the US pretext for creating more pressure on Russia in preparation for the Ukraine invasion that was soon to follow.

In short this accomplished many of the goals of the globalist agenda, weakening the US economy in order to provide an international power vacuum from its collapse, providing a push for international control of the net, creating hysteria over hackers justifying totalitarian internet legislation, demonizing Russia by sending Snowden there, and also putting the world on notice that they are being watched to create a massive chill effect. This is just the strategy of sockpuppeting extended into real life and at a much larger scale. Also in the end, the world now has a hero figure to worship that they can use to control the opposition and use as an outlet for disinformation at any time.

http://50-shades-of-abuse.blogspot.com.au/2016/11/julian-assange-has-been-taken-wikileaks.html