WikiLeaks founder charged with rape, molestation

  Quote

Assange no longer suspicious

lol

did anyone take seriously the earlier smear campaign where they tried to blame Assange for the revealing of 'hundreds of afghani sources' making him seem to be a reckless person who doesn't care if innocent Afghanis get killed or not.

hilariously he offered the military a grace period or window of time to redact whatever names they wanted from the list.... they refused... then pretended that Assange asked them no such thing.. but then were caught lying if you compile the entirty of their public statements regarding it. see Why won't the Pentagon help WikiLeaks redact documents? i find this part particularly funny

  Quote

After the last release, the Pentagon very flamboyantly accused WikiLeaks of endangering the lives of innocent Afghans, even accusing them of having "blood on their hands" (despite the absence of a single claim that anyone was actually harmed from the release of those documents). If Pentagon officials are truly concerned about the well-being of Afghan sources identified in these documents -- rather than exaggerating and exploiting that concern in order to harm WikiLeaks' credibility -- wouldn't they be eager to help WikiLeaks redact these documents? That would be the behavior one would expect if these concerns were at all genuine.

 

Instead, the Pentagon is doing the opposite: first lying by denying that WikiLeaks ever sought this help, then refusing to provide it in response

doesn't surprise me that a fake rape charge was made up for him, seems like the fuckers are trying anything that will stick

  On 8/21/2010 at 9:05 PM, Awepittance said:

did anyone take seriously the earlier smear campaign where they tried to blame Assange for the revealing of 'hundreds of afghani sources' making him seem to be a reckless person who doesn't care if innocent Afghanis get killed or not.

hilariously he offered the military a grace period or window of time to redact whatever names they wanted from the list.... they refused... then pretended that Assange asked them no such thing.. but then were caught lying if you compile the entirty of their public statements regarding it. see Why won't the Pentagon help WikiLeaks redact documents? i find this part particularly funny

 

  Quote

After the last release, the Pentagon very flamboyantly accused WikiLeaks of endangering the lives of innocent Afghans, even accusing them of having "blood on their hands" (despite the absence of a single claim that anyone was actually harmed from the release of those documents). If Pentagon officials are truly concerned about the well-being of Afghan sources identified in these documents -- rather than exaggerating and exploiting that concern in order to harm WikiLeaks' credibility -- wouldn't they be eager to help WikiLeaks redact these documents? That would be the behavior one would expect if these concerns were at all genuine.

 

Instead, the Pentagon is doing the opposite: first lying by denying that WikiLeaks ever sought this help, then refusing to provide it in response

 

doesn't surprise me that a fake rape charge was made up for him, seems like the fuckers are trying anything that will stick

or perhaps you don't know shit and your opinion means nothing.

  On 8/21/2010 at 10:52 PM, pulsewarrior said:

  On 8/21/2010 at 9:05 PM, Awepittance said:

did anyone take seriously the earlier smear campaign where they tried to blame Assange for the revealing of 'hundreds of afghani sources' making him seem to be a reckless person who doesn't care if innocent Afghanis get killed or not.

hilariously he offered the military a grace period or window of time to redact whatever names they wanted from the list.... they refused... then pretended that Assange asked them no such thing.. but then were caught lying if you compile the entirty of their public statements regarding it. see Why won't the Pentagon help WikiLeaks redact documents? i find this part particularly funny

 

  Quote

After the last release, the Pentagon very flamboyantly accused WikiLeaks of endangering the lives of innocent Afghans, even accusing them of having "blood on their hands" (despite the absence of a single claim that anyone was actually harmed from the release of those documents). If Pentagon officials are truly concerned about the well-being of Afghan sources identified in these documents -- rather than exaggerating and exploiting that concern in order to harm WikiLeaks' credibility -- wouldn't they be eager to help WikiLeaks redact these documents? That would be the behavior one would expect if these concerns were at all genuine.

 

Instead, the Pentagon is doing the opposite: first lying by denying that WikiLeaks ever sought this help, then refusing to provide it in response

 

doesn't surprise me that a fake rape charge was made up for him, seems like the fuckers are trying anything that will stick

 

or perhaps you don't know shit and your opinion means nothing.

whoa there, adrian lamo.

fookin world makes no sense.

  On 8/21/2010 at 10:52 PM, pulsewarrior said:

  On 8/21/2010 at 9:05 PM, Awepittance said:

did anyone take seriously the earlier smear campaign where they tried to blame Assange for the revealing of 'hundreds of afghani sources' making him seem to be a reckless person who doesn't care if innocent Afghanis get killed or not.

hilariously he offered the military a grace period or window of time to redact whatever names they wanted from the list.... they refused... then pretended that Assange asked them no such thing.. but then were caught lying if you compile the entirty of their public statements regarding it. see Why won't the Pentagon help WikiLeaks redact documents? i find this part particularly funny

 

  Quote

After the last release, the Pentagon very flamboyantly accused WikiLeaks of endangering the lives of innocent Afghans, even accusing them of having "blood on their hands" (despite the absence of a single claim that anyone was actually harmed from the release of those documents). If Pentagon officials are truly concerned about the well-being of Afghan sources identified in these documents -- rather than exaggerating and exploiting that concern in order to harm WikiLeaks' credibility -- wouldn't they be eager to help WikiLeaks redact these documents? That would be the behavior one would expect if these concerns were at all genuine.

 

Instead, the Pentagon is doing the opposite: first lying by denying that WikiLeaks ever sought this help, then refusing to provide it in response

 

doesn't surprise me that a fake rape charge was made up for him, seems like the fuckers are trying anything that will stick

 

or perhaps you don't know shit and your opinion means nothing.

i always value the opinion of people who *offer no counter argument or facts of their own the highest. thank you

  On 8/21/2010 at 10:57 PM, Hoodie said:

  On 8/21/2010 at 10:52 PM, pulsewarrior said:

  On 8/21/2010 at 9:05 PM, Awepittance said:

did anyone take seriously the earlier smear campaign where they tried to blame Assange for the revealing of 'hundreds of afghani sources' making him seem to be a reckless person who doesn't care if innocent Afghanis get killed or not.

hilariously he offered the military a grace period or window of time to redact whatever names they wanted from the list.... they refused... then pretended that Assange asked them no such thing.. but then were caught lying if you compile the entirty of their public statements regarding it. see Why won't the Pentagon help WikiLeaks redact documents? i find this part particularly funny

 

  Quote

After the last release, the Pentagon very flamboyantly accused WikiLeaks of endangering the lives of innocent Afghans, even accusing them of having "blood on their hands" (despite the absence of a single claim that anyone was actually harmed from the release of those documents). If Pentagon officials are truly concerned about the well-being of Afghan sources identified in these documents -- rather than exaggerating and exploiting that concern in order to harm WikiLeaks' credibility -- wouldn't they be eager to help WikiLeaks redact these documents? That would be the behavior one would expect if these concerns were at all genuine.

 

Instead, the Pentagon is doing the opposite: first lying by denying that WikiLeaks ever sought this help, then refusing to provide it in response

 

doesn't surprise me that a fake rape charge was made up for him, seems like the fuckers are trying anything that will stick

 

or perhaps you don't know shit and your opinion means nothing.

 

whoa there, adrian lamo.

full on LOL

bahahaha this thread rules because of that statement.

Next time two girls implausibly offer you a 3 way, ask yourself this:

Have I just pissed off the most powerful government in the world?

  On 8/21/2010 at 11:51 PM, analogue wings said:

Next time two girls implausibly offer you a 3 way, ask yourself this:

 

Have I just pissed off the most powerful government in the world?

they like to butter you up before the Guantanamo anal fisting sessions

LMAO @ this page

no that's iceland

the case has been reopened: http://mashable.com/2010/09/01/assange-sexual-assault-case-reopened/

"what did ii i iiii doo wroooong!" yeah yeah.. this is how we do it

might be one of them koch brothers pulling the strings again....

  On 8/21/2010 at 9:05 PM, Awepittance said:

did anyone take seriously the earlier smear campaign where they tried to blame Assange for the revealing of 'hundreds of afghani sources' making him seem to be a reckless person who doesn't care if innocent Afghanis get killed or not.

hilariously he offered the military a grace period or window of time to redact whatever names they wanted from the list.... they refused... then pretended that Assange asked them no such thing.. but then were caught lying if you compile the entirty of their public statements regarding it. see Why won't the Pentagon help WikiLeaks redact documents? i find this part particularly funny

 

  Quote

After the last release, the Pentagon very flamboyantly accused WikiLeaks of endangering the lives of innocent Afghans, even accusing them of having "blood on their hands" (despite the absence of a single claim that anyone was actually harmed from the release of those documents). If Pentagon officials are truly concerned about the well-being of Afghan sources identified in these documents -- rather than exaggerating and exploiting that concern in order to harm WikiLeaks' credibility -- wouldn't they be eager to help WikiLeaks redact these documents? That would be the behavior one would expect if these concerns were at all genuine.

 

Instead, the Pentagon is doing the opposite: first lying by denying that WikiLeaks ever sought this help, then refusing to provide it in response

 

doesn't surprise me that a fake rape charge was made up for him, seems like the fuckers are trying anything that will stick

yep, that's exactly what i thought when i saw it. it's too coincidental.

I don't think they intend to make the charges stick. It's just a classic character defamation tactic. Discredit him by making him seem like a shady pervert.

  On 9/1/2010 at 2:35 PM, mafted said:

  On 8/21/2010 at 9:05 PM, Awepittance said:

did anyone take seriously the earlier smear campaign where they tried to blame Assange for the revealing of 'hundreds of afghani sources' making him seem to be a reckless person who doesn't care if innocent Afghanis get killed or not.

hilariously he offered the military a grace period or window of time to redact whatever names they wanted from the list.... they refused... then pretended that Assange asked them no such thing.. but then were caught lying if you compile the entirty of their public statements regarding it. see Why won't the Pentagon help WikiLeaks redact documents? i find this part particularly funny

 

  Quote

After the last release, the Pentagon very flamboyantly accused WikiLeaks of endangering the lives of innocent Afghans, even accusing them of having "blood on their hands" (despite the absence of a single claim that anyone was actually harmed from the release of those documents). If Pentagon officials are truly concerned about the well-being of Afghan sources identified in these documents -- rather than exaggerating and exploiting that concern in order to harm WikiLeaks' credibility -- wouldn't they be eager to help WikiLeaks redact these documents? That would be the behavior one would expect if these concerns were at all genuine.

 

Instead, the Pentagon is doing the opposite: first lying by denying that WikiLeaks ever sought this help, then refusing to provide it in response

 

doesn't surprise me that a fake rape charge was made up for him, seems like the fuckers are trying anything that will stick

 

yep, that's exactly what i thought when i saw it. it's too coincidental.

you guys should be detectives

  On 9/2/2010 at 2:55 AM, Ricky Downtown said:

  On 9/1/2010 at 2:35 PM, mafted said:

 

yep, that's exactly what i thought when i saw it. it's too coincidental.

 

you guys should be detectives

pretty big lol

Rape charges have been reinstated after more questioning (increased payoff) of the victim...

  On 9/2/2010 at 5:22 PM, Joy Rex said:

Rape charges have been reinstated after more questioning (increased payoff) of the victim...

This will never end, obviously.

Perlence Assrange 6-36 imo.

and why do you think that? intuition? it trumps naivety pretty well.

  On 9/2/2010 at 7:35 PM, mafted said:

and why do you think that? intuition? it trumps naivety pretty well.

Because a rape accusation follows you around forever, regardless of the outcome/truth. Just ask Kobe Bryant.

Kobe really is a huge fucking rapist, though, lol.

(I just wanted to say "Perlence Assrange")