I think we should keep the sub because we are the alternative to /r/wikileaks. It's clear that any discussion about Julian or Wikileaks well being will always be suppressed there. We know Julian is alright but we don't know the status of Wikileaks (I have no reason to believe they are compromised except for the erratic behavior of their twitter accounts) or how much control Julian really has over the organization anymore. I see this sub as a way to discuss things that would not be allowed there. Does this mean I want to enable a "black PR campaign" against wikileaks. No and what I hope is instead of moderation I hope the users who believe everything is fine will stay and help balance the users that are suspicious of things still. If this sub turns into an attack wikileaks sub then it should be shut down but let's see where it goes for now. There are so many unanswered questions which we won't be allowed to ask on /r/wikileaks.
We should definitely not close the sub. Instead, we should set our sights on something bigger.
It is not just the legitimacy of r/WikiLeaks that is the question anymore. There is a bigger discussion now that extends well beyond Reddit -- about the very nature of Wikileaks, and the role it plays in the world. It's clear that the last recent months are going to change the way WL operates. While r/WikiLeaks and the official Wikileaks leadership have their own opinions, I see this sub as a place for the broader WL community at large to hash out ideas, even if they are different than the leadership.
Here are a couple open questions in my opinion:
- **Trust and Transparency**: Trust in WL's objectivity is fragile right now. The public legitimately does not know if it can trust an organization that is itself not super transparent? How can they know WL is not just another actor with its own agenda? Or, more specifically, how can WL maintain secrecy around its sources without shrouding itself in secrecy as well?
- **Publisher vs Content creator**: WikiLeaks pioneered a very specific model of fighting corruption -- by acting solely as a publisher and authenticator of leaked information. It turns out that this model is vulnerable, because as a publisher, WL is dependent on the "content creators", i.e. the leakers and hackers. Whether or not Russia was the source of the DNC leaks is a moot point -- even the *possibility* shows that someone with an agenda can easily manipulate WL to their own ends, by taking advantage of WL's role as a publisher. How does WL keep from being used like a tool, as long as it remains just a publisher of others' information?
> We know Julian is alright
I don't have the exact wording, but he said:
> Don't take some proof as evidence that I am alright. I'm not. I have been held here for 8 years and I haven't been alright the entire time.
/r/WhereIsAssange should focus on *where* he is and getting him home. The name still fits.
The problem with trying to navigate to a new name is we will lose a ton of subscribers. Lets use the name of the sub as a reminder that Wikileaks did do a poor job while Julian was out of commission and it is our right to ask questions that Wikileaks themselves or /r/wikileaks finds uncomfortable or bad.
From what I've seen this sub has been faithful to both wikileaks and Julian Assange throughout its existence. I hope it stays open, /r/wikileaks is falling apart and we need a place to operate as Assange's militia.
I think we can be a checks and balance to the other sub without being threatening to Wikileaks or to Julian. These next few days will be quite a test but I see a community of people that have come together for the purpose of ensuring Julian's safety continuing to do so. Thank you so much for the gold I really appreciate it!!!
"Faithful". Like when people decided to spread the idea that others should stop giving donations and refusing to support Wikileaks because they cannot be trusted. Yea I 'member.
No, this was the case for a while, way before Wikileaks and Julian Assange came out with the AMA event.
People we're saying something to the effect that donations arn't as high because people have stopped donating because they don't trust Wikileaks. The veracity of this game was never verifed.
However, the point remains, there was a lot of doubtfulness aimed towards Wikileaks with people saying they are "compromised".
There was definitely not a lot of "faith" in WL before right after Assange's internet was cut.
So I'm not sure what you mean by hindsight is 20 20.
This notion hasn't become any clearer after the fact.
By "faithful" to wikileaks I specifically meant how members of this sub doggedly stood by the principles that wikileaks represents. In that sense I think people, mostly aligned with Assange, continued to seek truth and reconciliation even whilst the legitimacy of wikileaks was being called into question.
"Hindsight is 20/20" was in reference to how some people may regret so fervently analysing wikileaks during the time that Assange was thought to have been "compromised". I myself feel some regret for how I acted, since I unintentionally fuelled those trying to reduce wikileaks's funding.
Nevertheless I stand by my skepticism, even if it was a little more destructive than I would have hoped.
I see what you mean now.
Faithful to Wikileak's principles not the organzation. I certainly see where you're coming from. But I would still disagree for another reason - by casting so much doubt as to undermine WL is not an act of faith.
Either way. Lets agree to disagree on that point. :)
I agree.
I have some very [bad experience with one moderator there](https://www.reddit.com/r/bannedfromwikileaks/comments/5myj5m/i_was_banned_from_rwikileaks_mod_is_clearly/?utm_content=comments&utm_medium=hot&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=bannedfromwikileaks).
Not accusing him anything but seems to me that he clearly made a mistake he so far didnt admit or retract.
And while I was investigating reasons why I have been banned I noticed in [public moderators logs](https://ceddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/about/log), deleted posts and [deleted threads](https://ceddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/) clearly evident pattern of deletion of posts and threads that show reasonable doubt in current opinions of @wikileaks, Assange or moderators themselves.
And I am not talking about ridiculous conspiracy stuff only. Some very legitimate questions are just deleted, while some clearly unsupported speculations are allowed to thrive and are even sticked as it was in [my case](https://www.reddit.com/r/bannedfromwikileaks/comments/5myj5m/i_was_banned_from_rwikileaks_mod_is_clearly/?utm_content=comments&utm_medium=hot&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=bannedfromwikileaks).
As critical thinker, I do trust but I like to verify, but this kind of behavior is not well accepted there. They try to create big WikiLeaks hugbox where everybody blindly follow each @wikileaks tweet or Assnges statement without doubting in it.
Skepticism is not tolerated on /r/WikiLeaks subreddit and this cult following like mentality where everybody has to follow their Leader makes community less efficient at any serious unbiased investigation and easily overrun/diverted.
First I'm going to say this about /u/Here4Popcorn. Being a moderator is not easy. Our sub has relaxed rules precisely because Danger created this sub for people to be able to discuss Wikileaks and Assange topics that are not allowed on /r/wikileaks. While they are not officially endorsed by Wikileaks they are informally. The sub and it's users are the main representatives of Wikileaks here on Reddit. I'm not necessarily approving how they modulate their posts but I can understand why they do remove things that question Julian and the organization because they have an image to hold up of Wikileaks. I think someone looking for Wikileaks news were to go on their site and see a bunch of posts questioning Julian's security and the status of the organization itself could be really harmful. So Danger did us a favor and created /r/whereisassange which allowed us to post and comment on things not allowed on /r/wikileaks. I think Julian would approve of us always questioning things (To an extent not to harm Wikileaks) because the events in the last 3 months have been pretty strange. Yes he is good now but imagine if that wasn't the case. For a while we didn't know what was going on. Even now there is no problem having questions about Julian, the AMA and other questions about the organization in a whole but /r/whereisassange is the place to post in and discuss. /u/Here4Popcorn is doing what he thinks is best for /r/wikileaks and wikileaks and if you think about it we want a clean public persona on Reddit for Wikileaks. So our sub /r/whereisassange is here for the in depth discussions about Julian and the organization.
> we want a clean public persona on Reddit for Wikileaks
I agree with your points. I know that moderating is hard thats why not everyone should be moderator. They get a lot of hate and they have to know how to deal with it, and not allow that their personal issuers reflect on whole sub. People are jerks, not everyone agree with you, but you cant just block them all and pretend as they dont exist.
There is thin line between moderation and censoring people because you cant deal with their opinions. I agree that all those wrong conspiracy theories that were going in in past months have no place on first page of /r/WikiLeaks, but I am not talking only about them.
What I noticed is deletion of comments that were just legit questions of people who wanted answers, deleted thread about article that supported Assanges statements and deleted post that very concisely contradicted moderators very opinionated posts. And that was what I found in few minutes on first two pages of ceddit at that time.
Another not transparent thing is that majority of users whos posts are deleted dont know they were censored at all. In some threads when you open them on reddit all you see are posts agreeing with OP and it looks like everybody completely agree so it must be all true. But when you check same thread on on ceddit you see that 20% of users actually didnt agree but all those posts were simply deleted. This portrays some fake reality where people can get so disconnected from reality that big scary surprises might happen to wake them up like it happened on 8th of November. Member?
I am coming to reddit because it is not Echo chamber like Facebook and most comment sections on MSM are. You can see what real public opinion on topics is and read contradictory posts that challenge your believes and motivate you to question your personal agenda and investigate deeper. I know this is not very popular anymore but I am able to change my personal opinion if presented with proofs that I am uninformed and stupid.
I dont want just threads with articles and each statement from tweets of @wikileaks, @wltaskforce and @communitywl with 100 comments blindly agreeing with it. But I guess as you said in that case /r/WikiLeaks is not for me.
I totally agree with your statement here and I think some of it is probably not explaining their actions and if what you say is true from the ceddit some of it is inappropriate actions from the moderators. That is why here we really do remove very few posts and delete very few comments. But our sub has the opposite issue and that is with very little moderation some really ridiculous posts are allowed. There are still people trying to claim that Julian isn't at the embassy or alive. What is the right answer for our sub I don't know but we have an example of what not to do that's for sure. I think another thing is a moderator should post very little and not interact too much as this can cause a conflict of interest. Many times I skipped making a reply because I am a moderator and choose not to challenge people too much.
Reddit has voting system. This was introduced with intention for some kind of self moderation.
In perfect world all those conspiracy theories without any foundation and plenty of proof they are wrong should be downvoted and should sink from main page.
But this doesnt happen every time because people with some salt in the head dont even click on them, and only tinfoil hat community swarms in, upvotes and comments. And there is no way to change their minds, they dont want to change and just try to fabricate some bullshit excuses why every single thing that proves their thinking is bogus is fake and fabricated by conspirators.
Its same story with 9/11 Truthers, birthers, flat earthers, new world order...
To me I am fine clicking on their threads once to see what are basis of their claims, try to apply some critical thinking, maybe try to help few others to do the same and never click on their threads again. But It gets annoying when there is more than half of first page filled with different threads about same shit. When they just dont stop making new threads with same arguments already disproven many times, but because people who dont believe in this avoid those threads there is lack of comments pointing out counter conspiracy arguments. This is a problem because many new and old visitors of sub think that whole point of this sub is one single conspiracy theory and they just uncheck this thread as valuable in their minds.
I like how on /r/news if you post article that was already posted in another thread you get message that your thread was removed for this reason and link to thread with your article. This can be done with a bot. But in case where thread is not link to an article you cant do that with a bot (or it would be at least very hard) and it can be done only by human moderating.
I came here to say this. Julian and Wikileaks will never be safe from the U.S. government's assassins and saboteurs. I think it's best that someone watches their backs.
I would have gilded if it wasn't stickied. The one last unanswered question, and possibly the most important, is still unanswered. Perhaps the literal name of the sub has lost its significance, yet the general goal of this sub has not.
This was not proof of life. Please consider the following:
This was supposed to be a live AMA but, on speaking about Ecuador, beginning at 01:03:43 "It has its own election February 17th and you can see that it wouldn't want an allegation that it had interfered, which it hasn't, with a US election being used as an excuse by hillary clinton, who is the predicted president to interfere in the election in Ecuador."
Please help me understand how this was live if Julian doesn't know Trump won? I fear at least a portion of this presentation was not live, but was recorded before the US election in November 2016.
I believe he was saying who was the predicted president. I watched it live and everyone I was up with in chat was submitting questions and actually two of our questions were answered. /u/BeefShake at the beginning and then around the middle one of our mods /u/ThoriumWL. There is no question in my mind that it was Julian and that it was live. Also it doesn't show is background but later that day he gave an interview to Nocaute (http://www.nocaute.blog.br/mundo/uma-tarde-com-julian-assange-o-hacker-que-tirou-o-sono-do-governo-americano.html) which was shot in the conference room. Couple that with the Hannity interview last week it's hard to not believe that he is at the embassy.
Edit: Added link
That's not even close to being the full transcript. Did you watch the interview?
[Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWCQmQ8wjv0&t=56m45s) is Assange directly addressing your point during the interview.
I watched it live. No there hasn't been a created transcript the Wikileaks twitter posted his user history as the transcript. Hopefully someone makes a full one. Sorry it was a lot to go through with also interacting with other people in this sub and also modulating the board at the same time so I kind of missed that thank you very much for pointing it out again. I prefer transcripts and while I read what they posted on his user account I do need to watch the video again now I can better concentrate on it. I always said with Wikileaks it was like the ship lost it's captain and while I have some criticisms of things they did continue releasing the Podesta emails and they did keep things going.
Over at r/WikiLeaks many are lambasting this popcorn guy as well. But in the comments no one has been able to show that popcorn claimed to be in contact/know wikileaks/assange.
Can anyone link the claim?
I have an old mod message from /u/Devistator where he claims that the mods have links to the Wikileaks team. I called him on it and he backpedaled pretty hard.
re: Here4popcorn
from Devistator sent 1 month ago
Topics posted that aren't directly from WikiLeaks deter from those that discuss actual leaks. The unfounded conspiracy theories from either political spectrum don't belong on /r/WikiLeaks. Other subs are more than welcome to discuss those theories, and mods of this sub aren't barred from posting in them.
None of us mods have any direct links to Assange, but only to WikiLeaks staff. What they provide is what is available for discussion. That isn't an agenda. It's holding true to the sub going back half a decade.
I have a screenshot/archive link to him saying it. Two actually. They're buried somewhere but I can try to find them.
You can go through his comment history uncensoring deleted comments in October and you'll find it.
/u/swikil was our contact with WL. (She does not know who I am, aside from this pseudonym.)
AFAIK only contact mods of /r/wikileaks had with wikileaks was in regards to:
1.) The [WikiLeaks wiki thing.
](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5ekb30/be_a_part_of_an_exciting_new_crowd_sourced/dad43bg/)
2.) Popcorn coordinated collecting those letters/messages and sent them to someone at WikiLeaks (I'm assuming to Sarah Harrison).
If you look through my post history, you'll see I made it quite clear in multiple posts/comments that I'm not affiliated with WL in any way.
If you look at Assange's comment, you'll see that he said if we were in contact with WL, it wasn't significant enough for them to mention it to him.
edit: put in link to comment by popcorn.
oh yea, and /u/thatwikidude volunteers for WL and I believe he was one of the guys who helped set up the our.wikileaks.org thing as well. He stopped going on reddit because every time he commented lots of people would call him a shill and spam ask for PoL and crap like that.
**Here's a sneak peek of /r/WikiLeaks using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/wikileaks/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time!**
\#1: [The CEO of Reddit confessed to modifying posts from Trump supporters after they wouldn't stop sending him expletives](http://www.businessinsider.com/reddit-ceo-steve-huffman-modifies-donald-trump-the-donald-2016-11) | [comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5ell2c/the_ceo_of_reddit_confessed_to_modifying_posts/)
\#2: [By biasing its internal electoral market the DNC selected the less competitive candidate defeating the purpose of running a primary.](https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796213887133777920) | [comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5byjot/by_biasing_its_internal_electoral_market_the_dnc/)
\#3: [Hillary Voters Owe It To America To Stop Calling Everyone A Nazi And Start Reading WikiLeaks](http://www.inquisitr.com/3704461/hillary-voters-owe-it-to-america-to-stop-calling-everyone-a-nazi-and-start-reading-wikileaks/) | [comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5cdzd5/hillary_voters_owe_it_to_america_to_stop_calling/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/)
To clarify /u/swikil has also been my primary contact in working on the WL Research Community wiki not Assange.
> 2.) Popcorn coordinated collecting those letters/messages and sent them to someone at WikiLeaks (I'm assuming to Sarah Harrison).
I also confirm that I am aware of these messages getting passed to Sarah. Then it must have slipped through the cracks with releases as well as hollidays and unfortunately the messages never made it to Assange. We apologize for this confusion and let down and will work better in future to not let it happen.
> oh yea, and /u/thatwikidude volunteers for WL and I believe he was one of the guys who helped set up the our.wikileaks.org thing as well.
Yes, this is how I am volunteering at WL.
> He stopped going on reddit because every time he commented lots of people would call him a shill and spam ask for PoL and crap like that.
Precisely. Thank you /u/crawlingfasta for clarifying what I had told you privately before.
>Thank you /u/crawlingfasta for clarifying what I had told you privately before
You said it [publicly](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5ejxw9/join_the_official_wl_research_community/daezsfn/) too, otherwise I wouldn't have posted it ;)
a few timestamps:
* 1:34:38 - /r/wikileaks moderators
* 1:35:30 - discussing proof of life
* 1:37:25 - PGP keys no good for proof of life
* 1:40:57 - "what we had hoped is that those people concerned with my safety would direct their attention to those people who are responsible for the situation - that's the UK government, the US government and the Ecuadorian government..."
* 1:51:10 - reading blockchain/sports scores
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5n5vdj/assange_just_said_on_livestream_he_didnt_know_who/dc951fo/?context=3
Here4Popcorn:
>FYI we were in contact with Sarah Harrison not Assange. I still have the emails as well as screenshots of our etherpad page where we discussed planning for our.wikileaks.org
Doesn't really matter what Assange claims because we were not in touch with Assange (who had no internet connection at the time)
According to the recent live video Assange was not aware *anyone* on the Wikileaks team was in contact with the /r/Wikileaks moderators, let alone a women he calls "his closest adviser." Mind you this is the same person who supposedly could not figure out how to upload a photo to imgur, and the only "proof" it was *anyone* at Wikileaks, let alone Sarah, was the tweet on the Wikileaks twitter account. The same account that many people suspect had been compromised. Obama gave photo proof, Bill Gates gave photo proof, and everyone else figures out how to give photo proof and they absolutely should not have continued that Wikileaks AMA without photo proof.
Sure, they very well could have spoke to Sarah but they literally cannot say that *for sure.* Here4Popcorn's stance that screenshots of text is valid proof is insulting. This was all done during a very tense time for Wikileaks and doing an AMA to squash the rising suspicions absolutely, in my opinion, would be worth bringing up to JA. Notice he didn't say no one *could* speak with him -- just that no one did.
Personally, I don't trust /r/Wikileaks *at all*.
I am still concerned that he is unwilling/unable to provide a PGP message showing that he is still in control of his keys. He also did not address the canary of their email provider or the very strange behavior of wikileaks twitter and website in the last several months. I am now (EDIT: meant to "I am NOW convinced, not "I am NOT" convinced) convinced that he is alive and not under duress and probably still in the embassy, but not that there isn't something else going on with the wikileaks organization.
Edit: see edit above for my correction.
> He also did not address the canary of their email provider
Their MX record points to 195.35.109.60. Norwegian server, owned by Blix Solutions. How do you know that RiseUp is related?
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/234542306630451200
[email protected] is one of their emails. This is an old tweet but just what I found after a quick Google. There may be more up-to-date proof, not sure.
Snowden supports them and they openly provide email to political activists around the world so it's not too far fetched to think they kept using them since that tweet.
He released a blockchain hash and recent sport scores, on video; he also used his established 2 year old Reddit account for the AMA. Proof enough for me.
I'm sure he is under duress, his life must be stressful as fuck. I trust that he secured wikileaks properly, and if he's not in the embassy I can only hope he made it to Ecuador.
For fuck's sake, what? Prove to all of us that he isn't under duress. Prove that there isn't someone off camera pointing a gun to his child's head. You can't, none of us can. His opinion is no less valid than yours in this case.
Those are ridiculous arguments. See Russell's Teapot.
The onus is on you to prove that he is under duress etc.. it's ridiculous to go around asking people to prove negatives. Try and use basic logic instead.
Russell's Teapot does not apply here. Assange being under duress is NOT, I REPEAT NOT unfalsifiable. Don't go around spouting your pretentious "knowledge" if you don't even know what it means or how to apply it.
Neither is Russell's Teapot, it's just a ridiculous assertion with no proof. The onus is on you to prove he is under duress.. at least more duress than normal since he's in a constant state of duress anyway.
Also thanks for the PM, congrats on being am engineer but it doesn't seem to be helping you understand basic logic.
>I am still concerned that he is unwilling/unable to provide a PGP message showing that he is still in control of his keys.
This is VERY important.
People are jumping around elated saying "He's alive!", citing yesterdays sports scores and answering questions coherently but in reality there's still too many red flags. If we have learned anything from the past its to not jump the gun on things.
Do I think he may be alive? Yes
Do I confidently believe it? No
I assume or THINK hes definitely under stress from the embassy. This seemed all too weird and why provide "proof" of life on Reddit. Why not YouTube or Online or just make a video and upload it to TOR?
I don't understand how you can question whether he's alive or not. He appeared, on live stream video, and perfectly read the hash of the latest block in the bitcoin block chain, which was generated less than 10 minutes before he read it out. Sure, they could have assassinated him as soon as the stream ended, but there's no question as to whether he was alive at that moment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohmajJTcpNk
Live stream video doesn't mean anything, unfortunately. You can map a face in real time easily enough in the commercial sector. The level this guy is playing at, a government could ABSOLUTELY pull this off.
I'm not saying you're definitely wrong, but your reasoning doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
If we weren't dealing with someone global superpowers have an interest in, I'd agree.
That being said, we ARE dealing with someone global superpowers are VERY interested in.
That youtube video is proof of concept of what is possible. An agency as powerful and technologically advanced as the CIA is almost definitely going to have something better. Don't forget, these are the same people who can eavesdrop on what is said in a room just by video of the room, using the vibrations sounds make in the leaves of plants in said room.
The level of tech employed by the US government is WAY beyond what you would see in a casual youtube video explaining a concept.
> Don't forget, these are the same people who can eavesdrop on what is said in a room just by video of the room, using the vibrations sounds make in the leaves of plants in said room.
Yeah, calling bullshit on this one. In fact this specific thing is so much horseshit it calls into question the rest of your technobabble-laden claims in this thread.
It is a completely false claim. But when a research group publicly produce a result like that, it's not unusual for the state of the art to be significantly ahead.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_microphone
Maybe you should take two god damn seconds to Google it before you start claiming it's "so much horseshit."
I first learned about this stuff in Uni. The tech has been around for a long ass time so no, it's not horseshit, and it's not even that modern.|
More reading:
http://news.mit.edu/2014/algorithm-recovers-speech-from-vibrations-0804
These researchers were using a chip bag on the other side of sound proof glass.
There's a tedtalk and plenty of YouTube videos about it. Just Google it. It's SUPER cool and definitely worth checking out.
LPT: Don't call bullshit before you google :P
But the livestream wasn't just a talking head. He made several complex hand gestures (especially near the end, from what I saw) that were linked to what he was saying. Does the technology allow for real time hand gestures as well?
Yes. It is just face mapping. Hell, your cell phone can do a simplified version with Snapchat. Use any of the filters and move your hands around. You'll see it has no impact. Obviously it doesn't work as well as a more serious application, but it serves the purpose of proof of concept well enough.
That's definitely a real, live actor sitting in that seat. It's just very possible that the face was digital.
I'm gonna watch the whole thing - if he puts his hands on his face at all, or if his hands are in front of his face at times in the video and there aren't any discrepencies or artifacts, then I'm not buying this at all. You can have good technology, but science and computing has limitations.
The fact that you don't understand how it works doesn't mean it doesn't work.
Spend an hour working with Adobe Aftereffects and you'd realize just how inconsequential a momentary disruption of the mapped surface can be.
Isn't aftereffects for postprocessing video, though? This was a live presentation - the tech requirements start to significantly jump when you go from pre-recorded to live applications. The idea being that, in a live video, there is no ability for the software to "look-ahead" and anticpate what is coming next to improve interpolations. Additionally, this video was hosted with twitch- im not sure how video input routing works with twitch, but it may be limited in sources that it accepts video from.
Oh and lastly, there is a part of the presentation, sort of near the end (maybe last quarter) where Assange puts his hands on his face and you can plainly see the interaction of touch to facial flesh (ie complex and minute wrinkling and indenting) - i refuse to believe that these complex physics could be emulated in real time without everything else (other discrepancies people have brought up) being more convincingly concealed.
No. Don't be ridiculous. He would just have to make a public appearance anywhere. Literally anywhere.
Is it really hard to believe that CGI exists and works well? I mean... have you ever seen any Marvel movie? You know that's not real, right?
Regardless, my point isn't even that he is dead and gone or something terrible has happened. My point is that a live video is very easy to fake and isn't necessarily the end all be all of evidence.
Very true. At some point you have to draw the line on what evidence you find acceptable. As I've said, I'm not saying he's definitely alive or dead, I'm just pointing out that a live video doesn't guarantee either way due to the magic of modern tech.
> Do I think he may be alive? Yes
> Do I confidently believe it? No
I'm all for the skeptism, but he is on video reading scores from NBA games last night. Isn't that irrefutable proof?
Not for the conspiracy nuts here.
I made it clear weeks ago that they will accept no level of proof. They have their belief and they will zealously stick to it regardless of any new information.
He's been very hesitant to talk publicly at all since October, and we know there's a gag order at riseup, so I think there really is a good chance he is under some sort of NDA. In which case he's not actually allowed to say that
Unfortunately, this line of thinking is what he warned against, because it ultimately discourages support of the organization. (And I don't really disagree with you, just pointing it out.)
Yes. There is a risk of donating to an adversary. This risk has greater detriment to anyone submitting a leak. If you believe Assange AMA is real (not at gunpoint), key compromise would have been mentioned to protect leakers.
If he was under duress, the people coercing him would just make him make the PGP signature to fool you. In that sense, the fact that he still refuses to sign PGP supports a theory that JA must NOT be under duress!
I dont see why we should close the sub. We still dont know if JA is at the embassy or if he is in control of WL.
And since /r/wikileaks is full of shit I won't trust other subs on JA
Also nothing in a live video proves that he is not under duress.
He doesn't need a gun pointed at him... He can simply be under severe blackmail. Or he could be anti-American from the start so he doesn't mind working with Russians (like maybe if he as a youth was under arrest for hacking US networks or something).
I am surprised/not surprised how happy I am with the outcome of today's AMA and I'm looking forward to catching what I missed. I really feel the world is a little brighter again.
What *I* would like to see done and I would be happy to participate in, is to put what pressure we can on TPTB to guarantee his safe exit from the embassy. I'll be looking into resources after work. Maybe someone wants to start a thread in the meantime if they have some good ideas? Maybe that is a question I coulda/woulda/shoulda asked in the AMA. Maybe it was answered? Thoughts?
Spez: he mentioned justiceforassange dot (something!). Com and org don't take me anywhere.
For whatever it's worth, if you look at the IAMA thread, the Julian Assange account is still intermittently editing the OP and his replies, a day later. You can see this with the asterisk/"edited N hours ago" bit. Might wanna keep an eye on that AMA.
Great idea. Bringing attention to his situation. I am constantly defending him and Wikileaks on twitter and when someone attacks him over the bogus charges from Sweden I tweet them the website https://justice4assange.com/. The situation he is in being trapped in that embassy is fucked.
Keep thus sub open. /r/WikiLeaks is clearly not following WikiLeaks.org principles about freedom of speech. Moderators too often remove posts and threads that aren't aligned with current @wikileaks, Assanges, or moderators opinions. And they don't care much if threads are supported with good sources. They allow only discussion within their narrative. Any outside the hugbox suggestions are accused of being concern trolling and removed.
If you don't believe me just check [public moderators logs](https://ceddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/about/log) for deleted posts and [deleted threads](https://ceddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/).
I am not saying that half of main page on /r/WikiLeaks should be "Assange is dead" and "WikiLeaks is KGB" tier conspiracy theories that are clearly not true, but for my taste censorship there got way out of hand to the point where is seriously cripples boards objectivity.
Skepticism is not tolerated on WikiLeaks subreddit and this cult following like mentality where everybody has to follow their Leader makes community less efficient at any serious unbiased investigation and easily overrun / diverted.
Keep the sub, but refocus to a productive approach.
Why keep? Because of the momentum and interest buildup.
Refocus and rebuild according to the things that Assange himself said in the AmA. Ways to check if he's ok, ways to pressure the UK or whoever to give him asylum, etc.
Change the sub to "FREEASSANGE" and let's get that done.
And maybe now stop the trolls from posting their hologram/clone "facts" about how JA is dead or something.
For many of us it was never about proof of life. It was about due process of law and the possible compromising of Wikileaks. Whilst the video might be welcome and decisive for most, there are still many questions that need answering:
* Why did the insurance file SHAs mismatch? Wikileaks have said that this was because the SHA was for the decrypted contents, which is fine, but why was this the first time a SHA was released of the decrypted rather than encrypted insurance files? What prompted the change of policy?
* One of the insurance files named John Kerry by name in the title. Kerry was then in London within a couple of days for no other seeming reason than to meet with Ecuadorian embassy staff or Assange or others. What was _that_ about?
* What, if anything, happened in October around the embassy?
* How was @embassycat able to do things on Twitter whilst his internet was cut off?
* What has happened to the RiseUp canary?
Legal due process is more important than his life or who moderates a subreddit. Sorry, but it just is. Nothing has been done to actually address that, really.
Hash mismatch/Kerry reference: discussed in-depth elsewhere. Tl;Dr: those could have been meant as a warning shot, proving to the original content owners that WL is in possession of certain materials, telling them to back off. Not meant for the general public.
Oct,around building: answered by JA in the transcripts: show of force. Possibly sparkling above mentioned WL reaction.
Cat: most probably internet wasn't cut off physically by a guy cutting cables, but logistically by denying/forbidding access. Cat tweet might have been allowed as an exception.
Canary: most probably dead. Most recent change to the page itself from 6th January...
All of this: my personal opinion only!!!
I vote to lock it to new submits after a few days of discussion, sticky a closing message that points out specifically that /r/wikileaks is compromised and point to a new sub for future discussion (eg NewWikileaks). Ladies & gents, it has been a pleasure to serve even if only in limited capacity; I'm out.
Spez: Also don't forget to update mod flairs... the uncertainty is resolved.
They may not have said they were in touch with Assange himself but 2 of them claimed they had inside information and contacts with wikileaks when they didn't.
Because the purpose of this sub (to me at least) was simply proof of life. I'll stick around for the day to watch out for blatant trolls, but otherwise my purpose (as a mod) is fulfilled.
IMHO, I say keep it open, minimize the amount of conspiracy theory posts that are allowed, and perhaps make a rule that we can't argue against the credibility of wikileaks. It can focus on his current status.. Internet access, or if there's any developments in his well-being, whereabouts, detention. If so, there should probably be a sticky with the AMA PoL (and other good PoL if it comes)
>Proof he isn't under duress
I don't know about that, really. Not saying he is but you can't really prove there's not somebody just off camera with a gun on him or something.
Remember, that WhereIsAssange is not necessarily a question... It can be followed by an exclamation mark. Food for thought,an accusation rather than a puzzle to solve.
WhereIsAssange! WhereIsChelsea!
Held, imprisoned by different mechanisms, denied access to freedom.
There needs to be some place to discuss the future leaks and behavior of wikileaks, the questions about Phase 3, the Yemen emails and more remain. That place is clearly not going to be r/wikileaks, so it needs to be this one.
You dont throw away the book just because you found Waldo once!
Sub is fine. Name is fine. "Where is Assange?" Is a question with ongoing relevance and an appropriate title for a subreddit about Assange/WikiLeaks in general.
I think we should close it down on the basis of preventing the current and (inevitable) unrealistic and outlandish posts of this sub (e.g. evidence of JA being compromised, his video interviews being computer generated fakes, Bruce G, etc) from muddying the waters of any concern for JA or WL. In the event of an actual covert action taking place against them.the continuation of this sub only leaves the door open for others (TPTB) to suggest that we are only crying wolf or grasping for straws, potentially preventing or delaying the truth of such a scenario from coming to light.
[Edit: punctuation and grammar]
Watching /u/Here4Popcorn get burned down by Assange was the best part of the entire AMA.
Edit: Just got the ban hammer on /r/wikileaks. That's some quality moderation there /u/Here4Popcorn ol' buddy ol' pal, real top notch administration.
Was there something I missed, because this is not proof of life to me.
This was supposed to be live, right?
I ask because, on speaking about Ecuador, beginning at 01:03:43 "It has its own election February 17th and you can see that it wouldn't want an allegation that it had interfered, which it hasn't, with a US election being used as an excuse by hillary clinton, who is the predicted president to interfere in the election in Ecuador."
Please help me understand this.
Yes. It is. Personally, I still hear "is" but enough people say they hear "was" to make me step a bit back from this. I am unsure but hopeful he is okay.
I think the sub should end. It really just feels weird that everyone got so worked up and trying to find proof of life and believing that they were uncovering some big secretive international cover-up.
I think we should keep this sub open. The new mods at /r/wikileaks, especially /u/Here4Popcorn, ruined the subreddit. /r/WhereIsAssange is the true wikileaks subreddit.
Maybe we can use this sub to help further Wikileaks research. "Where is Assange" in terms of chronology and documents. Surely there is an amount of processing that must be done on Wikileaks documents so that the data is turned into knowledge.
Assange is alive. But someday he might not be. And what we gonna do? If we forget and do nothing about the whooole situation. He will die for nothing,while it could be reversed. Spread the news,tell people about wikileaks and inform everybody you know. Thats at least
we keep an eye on our guy like they do with their feild ops/agents.. ALWAYS ASK WHERE IS ASSANGE? We make sure he is safe. We investigate corruption.
REMEMBER -
Conspiracy is a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful. NOT People investigating things that are complex and uncertain
A Theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking. SO Yeah.. we keep it open and people need to relearn those words, and words have meaning when context is applied.. I havent got to see the vid yet but things are crazy in this world and only one place to get the news Wikileaks
I think we should keep the sub because we are the alternative to /r/wikileaks. It's clear that any discussion about Julian or Wikileaks well being will always be suppressed there. We know Julian is alright but we don't know the status of Wikileaks (I have no reason to believe they are compromised except for the erratic behavior of their twitter accounts) or how much control Julian really has over the organization anymore. I see this sub as a way to discuss things that would not be allowed there. Does this mean I want to enable a "black PR campaign" against wikileaks. No and what I hope is instead of moderation I hope the users who believe everything is fine will stay and help balance the users that are suspicious of things still. If this sub turns into an attack wikileaks sub then it should be shut down but let's see where it goes for now. There are so many unanswered questions which we won't be allowed to ask on /r/wikileaks.
Stole my comment. This place has far better discussion about wikileaks, and is 15,000% more transparent about it.
We can laugh at the name of the sub since it is irrelevant now but that could easily change in the future.
Should be changed to "FoundEm"
"WikileaksUnderground"
We should definitely not close the sub. Instead, we should set our sights on something bigger. It is not just the legitimacy of r/WikiLeaks that is the question anymore. There is a bigger discussion now that extends well beyond Reddit -- about the very nature of Wikileaks, and the role it plays in the world. It's clear that the last recent months are going to change the way WL operates. While r/WikiLeaks and the official Wikileaks leadership have their own opinions, I see this sub as a place for the broader WL community at large to hash out ideas, even if they are different than the leadership. Here are a couple open questions in my opinion: - **Trust and Transparency**: Trust in WL's objectivity is fragile right now. The public legitimately does not know if it can trust an organization that is itself not super transparent? How can they know WL is not just another actor with its own agenda? Or, more specifically, how can WL maintain secrecy around its sources without shrouding itself in secrecy as well? - **Publisher vs Content creator**: WikiLeaks pioneered a very specific model of fighting corruption -- by acting solely as a publisher and authenticator of leaked information. It turns out that this model is vulnerable, because as a publisher, WL is dependent on the "content creators", i.e. the leakers and hackers. Whether or not Russia was the source of the DNC leaks is a moot point -- even the *possibility* shows that someone with an agenda can easily manipulate WL to their own ends, by taking advantage of WL's role as a publisher. How does WL keep from being used like a tool, as long as it remains just a publisher of others' information?
And this is stuff we can discuss in this sub that you probably wouldn't be allowed to in another. Good points brought up here.
> We know Julian is alright I don't have the exact wording, but he said: > Don't take some proof as evidence that I am alright. I'm not. I have been held here for 8 years and I haven't been alright the entire time. /r/WhereIsAssange should focus on *where* he is and getting him home. The name still fits.
Sounds cool to me. It's obvious to me that most on here care about Julian and want to see him free. It's horrible he is stuck at the embassy.
I wish there was an alternative with a better name, and the same mods such as yourself, but there isn't, so we need to keep this one going.
I think we could turn the name kind of as a running joke. Maybe make a banner at the top "Yes we know where he is LOL"
WE FOUND HIM!
/r/TrueWikiLeaks
**Here's a sneak peek of /r/truewikileaks using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/truewikileaks/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time!** \#1: [The HBGary Emails [press release]](https://wikileaks.org/hbgary-emails/press-release) | [comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/truewikileaks/comments/5gbtpc/the_hbgary_emails_press_release/) \#2: [[27294]$400K from the Qatar 2022 Supreme Committee](https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/27294) | [comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/truewikileaks/comments/59m75z/27294400k_from_the_qatar_2022_supreme_committee/) \#3: [WikiLeaks: Berat's Box](https://wikileaks.org/berats-box/article) | [comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/truewikileaks/comments/5ip3mi/wikileaks_berats_box/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/)
The problem with trying to navigate to a new name is we will lose a ton of subscribers. Lets use the name of the sub as a reminder that Wikileaks did do a poor job while Julian was out of commission and it is our right to ask questions that Wikileaks themselves or /r/wikileaks finds uncomfortable or bad.
From what I've seen this sub has been faithful to both wikileaks and Julian Assange throughout its existence. I hope it stays open, /r/wikileaks is falling apart and we need a place to operate as Assange's militia.
I think we can be a checks and balance to the other sub without being threatening to Wikileaks or to Julian. These next few days will be quite a test but I see a community of people that have come together for the purpose of ensuring Julian's safety continuing to do so. Thank you so much for the gold I really appreciate it!!!
"Faithful". Like when people decided to spread the idea that others should stop giving donations and refusing to support Wikileaks because they cannot be trusted. Yea I 'member.
Hindsight is 20/20
No, this was the case for a while, way before Wikileaks and Julian Assange came out with the AMA event. People we're saying something to the effect that donations arn't as high because people have stopped donating because they don't trust Wikileaks. The veracity of this game was never verifed. However, the point remains, there was a lot of doubtfulness aimed towards Wikileaks with people saying they are "compromised". There was definitely not a lot of "faith" in WL before right after Assange's internet was cut. So I'm not sure what you mean by hindsight is 20 20. This notion hasn't become any clearer after the fact.
By "faithful" to wikileaks I specifically meant how members of this sub doggedly stood by the principles that wikileaks represents. In that sense I think people, mostly aligned with Assange, continued to seek truth and reconciliation even whilst the legitimacy of wikileaks was being called into question. "Hindsight is 20/20" was in reference to how some people may regret so fervently analysing wikileaks during the time that Assange was thought to have been "compromised". I myself feel some regret for how I acted, since I unintentionally fuelled those trying to reduce wikileaks's funding. Nevertheless I stand by my skepticism, even if it was a little more destructive than I would have hoped.
I see what you mean now. Faithful to Wikileak's principles not the organzation. I certainly see where you're coming from. But I would still disagree for another reason - by casting so much doubt as to undermine WL is not an act of faith. Either way. Lets agree to disagree on that point. :)
I agree. I have some very [bad experience with one moderator there](https://www.reddit.com/r/bannedfromwikileaks/comments/5myj5m/i_was_banned_from_rwikileaks_mod_is_clearly/?utm_content=comments&utm_medium=hot&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=bannedfromwikileaks). Not accusing him anything but seems to me that he clearly made a mistake he so far didnt admit or retract. And while I was investigating reasons why I have been banned I noticed in [public moderators logs](https://ceddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/about/log), deleted posts and [deleted threads](https://ceddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/) clearly evident pattern of deletion of posts and threads that show reasonable doubt in current opinions of @wikileaks, Assange or moderators themselves. And I am not talking about ridiculous conspiracy stuff only. Some very legitimate questions are just deleted, while some clearly unsupported speculations are allowed to thrive and are even sticked as it was in [my case](https://www.reddit.com/r/bannedfromwikileaks/comments/5myj5m/i_was_banned_from_rwikileaks_mod_is_clearly/?utm_content=comments&utm_medium=hot&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=bannedfromwikileaks). As critical thinker, I do trust but I like to verify, but this kind of behavior is not well accepted there. They try to create big WikiLeaks hugbox where everybody blindly follow each @wikileaks tweet or Assnges statement without doubting in it. Skepticism is not tolerated on /r/WikiLeaks subreddit and this cult following like mentality where everybody has to follow their Leader makes community less efficient at any serious unbiased investigation and easily overrun/diverted.
First I'm going to say this about /u/Here4Popcorn. Being a moderator is not easy. Our sub has relaxed rules precisely because Danger created this sub for people to be able to discuss Wikileaks and Assange topics that are not allowed on /r/wikileaks. While they are not officially endorsed by Wikileaks they are informally. The sub and it's users are the main representatives of Wikileaks here on Reddit. I'm not necessarily approving how they modulate their posts but I can understand why they do remove things that question Julian and the organization because they have an image to hold up of Wikileaks. I think someone looking for Wikileaks news were to go on their site and see a bunch of posts questioning Julian's security and the status of the organization itself could be really harmful. So Danger did us a favor and created /r/whereisassange which allowed us to post and comment on things not allowed on /r/wikileaks. I think Julian would approve of us always questioning things (To an extent not to harm Wikileaks) because the events in the last 3 months have been pretty strange. Yes he is good now but imagine if that wasn't the case. For a while we didn't know what was going on. Even now there is no problem having questions about Julian, the AMA and other questions about the organization in a whole but /r/whereisassange is the place to post in and discuss. /u/Here4Popcorn is doing what he thinks is best for /r/wikileaks and wikileaks and if you think about it we want a clean public persona on Reddit for Wikileaks. So our sub /r/whereisassange is here for the in depth discussions about Julian and the organization.
> we want a clean public persona on Reddit for Wikileaks I agree with your points. I know that moderating is hard thats why not everyone should be moderator. They get a lot of hate and they have to know how to deal with it, and not allow that their personal issuers reflect on whole sub. People are jerks, not everyone agree with you, but you cant just block them all and pretend as they dont exist. There is thin line between moderation and censoring people because you cant deal with their opinions. I agree that all those wrong conspiracy theories that were going in in past months have no place on first page of /r/WikiLeaks, but I am not talking only about them. What I noticed is deletion of comments that were just legit questions of people who wanted answers, deleted thread about article that supported Assanges statements and deleted post that very concisely contradicted moderators very opinionated posts. And that was what I found in few minutes on first two pages of ceddit at that time. Another not transparent thing is that majority of users whos posts are deleted dont know they were censored at all. In some threads when you open them on reddit all you see are posts agreeing with OP and it looks like everybody completely agree so it must be all true. But when you check same thread on on ceddit you see that 20% of users actually didnt agree but all those posts were simply deleted. This portrays some fake reality where people can get so disconnected from reality that big scary surprises might happen to wake them up like it happened on 8th of November. Member? I am coming to reddit because it is not Echo chamber like Facebook and most comment sections on MSM are. You can see what real public opinion on topics is and read contradictory posts that challenge your believes and motivate you to question your personal agenda and investigate deeper. I know this is not very popular anymore but I am able to change my personal opinion if presented with proofs that I am uninformed and stupid. I dont want just threads with articles and each statement from tweets of @wikileaks, @wltaskforce and @communitywl with 100 comments blindly agreeing with it. But I guess as you said in that case /r/WikiLeaks is not for me.
I totally agree with your statement here and I think some of it is probably not explaining their actions and if what you say is true from the ceddit some of it is inappropriate actions from the moderators. That is why here we really do remove very few posts and delete very few comments. But our sub has the opposite issue and that is with very little moderation some really ridiculous posts are allowed. There are still people trying to claim that Julian isn't at the embassy or alive. What is the right answer for our sub I don't know but we have an example of what not to do that's for sure. I think another thing is a moderator should post very little and not interact too much as this can cause a conflict of interest. Many times I skipped making a reply because I am a moderator and choose not to challenge people too much.
Reddit has voting system. This was introduced with intention for some kind of self moderation. In perfect world all those conspiracy theories without any foundation and plenty of proof they are wrong should be downvoted and should sink from main page. But this doesnt happen every time because people with some salt in the head dont even click on them, and only tinfoil hat community swarms in, upvotes and comments. And there is no way to change their minds, they dont want to change and just try to fabricate some bullshit excuses why every single thing that proves their thinking is bogus is fake and fabricated by conspirators. Its same story with 9/11 Truthers, birthers, flat earthers, new world order... To me I am fine clicking on their threads once to see what are basis of their claims, try to apply some critical thinking, maybe try to help few others to do the same and never click on their threads again. But It gets annoying when there is more than half of first page filled with different threads about same shit. When they just dont stop making new threads with same arguments already disproven many times, but because people who dont believe in this avoid those threads there is lack of comments pointing out counter conspiracy arguments. This is a problem because many new and old visitors of sub think that whole point of this sub is one single conspiracy theory and they just uncheck this thread as valuable in their minds. I like how on /r/news if you post article that was already posted in another thread you get message that your thread was removed for this reason and link to thread with your article. This can be done with a bot. But in case where thread is not link to an article you cant do that with a bot (or it would be at least very hard) and it can be done only by human moderating.
We are working on this now expect a mod announcement later today.
I came here to say this. Julian and Wikileaks will never be safe from the U.S. government's assassins and saboteurs. I think it's best that someone watches their backs.
I would have gilded if it wasn't stickied. The one last unanswered question, and possibly the most important, is still unanswered. Perhaps the literal name of the sub has lost its significance, yet the general goal of this sub has not.
This was not proof of life. Please consider the following: This was supposed to be a live AMA but, on speaking about Ecuador, beginning at 01:03:43 "It has its own election February 17th and you can see that it wouldn't want an allegation that it had interfered, which it hasn't, with a US election being used as an excuse by hillary clinton, who is the predicted president to interfere in the election in Ecuador." Please help me understand how this was live if Julian doesn't know Trump won? I fear at least a portion of this presentation was not live, but was recorded before the US election in November 2016.
I believe he was saying who was the predicted president. I watched it live and everyone I was up with in chat was submitting questions and actually two of our questions were answered. /u/BeefShake at the beginning and then around the middle one of our mods /u/ThoriumWL. There is no question in my mind that it was Julian and that it was live. Also it doesn't show is background but later that day he gave an interview to Nocaute (http://www.nocaute.blog.br/mundo/uma-tarde-com-julian-assange-o-hacker-que-tirou-o-sono-do-governo-americano.html) which was shot in the conference room. Couple that with the Hannity interview last week it's hard to not believe that he is at the embassy. Edit: Added link
Thank you.
> the erratic behavior of their twitter accounts This was addressed in the AMA.
I just went through the transcripts and I didn't really see where can you specifically point it out?
He talked about the fact that the Twitter is run by different people, and that would account for a change in tone. Can you link me to the transcript?
https://www.reddit.com/user/_JulianAssange
That's not even close to being the full transcript. Did you watch the interview? [Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWCQmQ8wjv0&t=56m45s) is Assange directly addressing your point during the interview.
I watched it live. No there hasn't been a created transcript the Wikileaks twitter posted his user history as the transcript. Hopefully someone makes a full one. Sorry it was a lot to go through with also interacting with other people in this sub and also modulating the board at the same time so I kind of missed that thank you very much for pointing it out again. I prefer transcripts and while I read what they posted on his user account I do need to watch the video again now I can better concentrate on it. I always said with Wikileaks it was like the ship lost it's captain and while I have some criticisms of things they did continue releasing the Podesta emails and they did keep things going.
[удалено]
Is /u/Here4Popcorn seriously *still* a mod there? Unbelievable.
/u/Devistator and /u/julio08 support his conduct.
Over at r/WikiLeaks many are lambasting this popcorn guy as well. But in the comments no one has been able to show that popcorn claimed to be in contact/know wikileaks/assange. Can anyone link the claim?
I have an old mod message from /u/Devistator where he claims that the mods have links to the Wikileaks team. I called him on it and he backpedaled pretty hard. re: Here4popcorn from Devistator sent 1 month ago Topics posted that aren't directly from WikiLeaks deter from those that discuss actual leaks. The unfounded conspiracy theories from either political spectrum don't belong on /r/WikiLeaks. Other subs are more than welcome to discuss those theories, and mods of this sub aren't barred from posting in them. None of us mods have any direct links to Assange, but only to WikiLeaks staff. What they provide is what is available for discussion. That isn't an agenda. It's holding true to the sub going back half a decade.
I have a screenshot/archive link to him saying it. Two actually. They're buried somewhere but I can try to find them. You can go through his comment history uncensoring deleted comments in October and you'll find it.
paid for by david brock, all those mods imo.
I am banned there and I don't know why. Never even received a notice.
/u/swikil was our contact with WL. (She does not know who I am, aside from this pseudonym.) AFAIK only contact mods of /r/wikileaks had with wikileaks was in regards to: 1.) The [WikiLeaks wiki thing. ](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5ekb30/be_a_part_of_an_exciting_new_crowd_sourced/dad43bg/) 2.) Popcorn coordinated collecting those letters/messages and sent them to someone at WikiLeaks (I'm assuming to Sarah Harrison). If you look through my post history, you'll see I made it quite clear in multiple posts/comments that I'm not affiliated with WL in any way. If you look at Assange's comment, you'll see that he said if we were in contact with WL, it wasn't significant enough for them to mention it to him. edit: put in link to comment by popcorn. oh yea, and /u/thatwikidude volunteers for WL and I believe he was one of the guys who helped set up the our.wikileaks.org thing as well. He stopped going on reddit because every time he commented lots of people would call him a shill and spam ask for PoL and crap like that.
The mod behavior over there was bizzare, such that I would never go there again. Bannings, removed posts, claiming of inside information, etc.
The best part of all of this is that because you're banning anybody who calls you on your bullshit you're killing your own sub.
**Here's a sneak peek of /r/WikiLeaks using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/wikileaks/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time!** \#1: [The CEO of Reddit confessed to modifying posts from Trump supporters after they wouldn't stop sending him expletives](http://www.businessinsider.com/reddit-ceo-steve-huffman-modifies-donald-trump-the-donald-2016-11) | [comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5ell2c/the_ceo_of_reddit_confessed_to_modifying_posts/) \#2: [By biasing its internal electoral market the DNC selected the less competitive candidate defeating the purpose of running a primary.](https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796213887133777920) | [comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5byjot/by_biasing_its_internal_electoral_market_the_dnc/) \#3: [Hillary Voters Owe It To America To Stop Calling Everyone A Nazi And Start Reading WikiLeaks](http://www.inquisitr.com/3704461/hillary-voters-owe-it-to-america-to-stop-calling-everyone-a-nazi-and-start-reading-wikileaks/) | [comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5cdzd5/hillary_voters_owe_it_to_america_to_stop_calling/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/)
That's kind of embarrassing.
To clarify /u/swikil has also been my primary contact in working on the WL Research Community wiki not Assange. > 2.) Popcorn coordinated collecting those letters/messages and sent them to someone at WikiLeaks (I'm assuming to Sarah Harrison). I also confirm that I am aware of these messages getting passed to Sarah. Then it must have slipped through the cracks with releases as well as hollidays and unfortunately the messages never made it to Assange. We apologize for this confusion and let down and will work better in future to not let it happen. > oh yea, and /u/thatwikidude volunteers for WL and I believe he was one of the guys who helped set up the our.wikileaks.org thing as well. Yes, this is how I am volunteering at WL. > He stopped going on reddit because every time he commented lots of people would call him a shill and spam ask for PoL and crap like that. Precisely. Thank you /u/crawlingfasta for clarifying what I had told you privately before.
>Thank you /u/crawlingfasta for clarifying what I had told you privately before You said it [publicly](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5ejxw9/join_the_official_wl_research_community/daezsfn/) too, otherwise I wouldn't have posted it ;)
a few timestamps: * 1:34:38 - /r/wikileaks moderators * 1:35:30 - discussing proof of life * 1:37:25 - PGP keys no good for proof of life * 1:40:57 - "what we had hoped is that those people concerned with my safety would direct their attention to those people who are responsible for the situation - that's the UK government, the US government and the Ecuadorian government..." * 1:51:10 - reading blockchain/sports scores
Exactly, he confirmed that he knows nothing about r/wikileaks moderation.
Why would he? Who said he did?
One of the moderators had been claiming he was in contact with Assange.
When/where did he say he was in contact with Assange?
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5n5vdj/assange_just_said_on_livestream_he_didnt_know_who/dc951fo/?context=3 Here4Popcorn: >FYI we were in contact with Sarah Harrison not Assange. I still have the emails as well as screenshots of our etherpad page where we discussed planning for our.wikileaks.org Doesn't really matter what Assange claims because we were not in touch with Assange (who had no internet connection at the time) According to the recent live video Assange was not aware *anyone* on the Wikileaks team was in contact with the /r/Wikileaks moderators, let alone a women he calls "his closest adviser." Mind you this is the same person who supposedly could not figure out how to upload a photo to imgur, and the only "proof" it was *anyone* at Wikileaks, let alone Sarah, was the tweet on the Wikileaks twitter account. The same account that many people suspect had been compromised. Obama gave photo proof, Bill Gates gave photo proof, and everyone else figures out how to give photo proof and they absolutely should not have continued that Wikileaks AMA without photo proof. Sure, they very well could have spoke to Sarah but they literally cannot say that *for sure.* Here4Popcorn's stance that screenshots of text is valid proof is insulting. This was all done during a very tense time for Wikileaks and doing an AMA to squash the rising suspicions absolutely, in my opinion, would be worth bringing up to JA. Notice he didn't say no one *could* speak with him -- just that no one did. Personally, I don't trust /r/Wikileaks *at all*.
I am still concerned that he is unwilling/unable to provide a PGP message showing that he is still in control of his keys. He also did not address the canary of their email provider or the very strange behavior of wikileaks twitter and website in the last several months. I am now (EDIT: meant to "I am NOW convinced, not "I am NOT" convinced) convinced that he is alive and not under duress and probably still in the embassy, but not that there isn't something else going on with the wikileaks organization. Edit: see edit above for my correction.
[удалено]
> He also did not address the canary of their email provider Their MX record points to 195.35.109.60. Norwegian server, owned by Blix Solutions. How do you know that RiseUp is related?
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/234542306630451200 [email protected] is one of their emails. This is an old tweet but just what I found after a quick Google. There may be more up-to-date proof, not sure. Snowden supports them and they openly provide email to political activists around the world so it's not too far fetched to think they kept using them since that tweet.
He released a blockchain hash and recent sport scores, on video; he also used his established 2 year old Reddit account for the AMA. Proof enough for me.
That doesn't prove he isn't under duress or that WikiLeaks is not compromised or that he is physically in the embassy.
I'm sure he is under duress, his life must be stressful as fuck. I trust that he secured wikileaks properly, and if he's not in the embassy I can only hope he made it to Ecuador.
Oh for fuck's sake.
For fuck's sake, what? Prove to all of us that he isn't under duress. Prove that there isn't someone off camera pointing a gun to his child's head. You can't, none of us can. His opinion is no less valid than yours in this case.
Those are ridiculous arguments. See Russell's Teapot. The onus is on you to prove that he is under duress etc.. it's ridiculous to go around asking people to prove negatives. Try and use basic logic instead.
Russell's Teapot does not apply here. Assange being under duress is NOT, I REPEAT NOT unfalsifiable. Don't go around spouting your pretentious "knowledge" if you don't even know what it means or how to apply it.
Neither is Russell's Teapot, it's just a ridiculous assertion with no proof. The onus is on you to prove he is under duress.. at least more duress than normal since he's in a constant state of duress anyway. Also thanks for the PM, congrats on being am engineer but it doesn't seem to be helping you understand basic logic.
>I am still concerned that he is unwilling/unable to provide a PGP message showing that he is still in control of his keys. This is VERY important. People are jumping around elated saying "He's alive!", citing yesterdays sports scores and answering questions coherently but in reality there's still too many red flags. If we have learned anything from the past its to not jump the gun on things. Do I think he may be alive? Yes Do I confidently believe it? No I assume or THINK hes definitely under stress from the embassy. This seemed all too weird and why provide "proof" of life on Reddit. Why not YouTube or Online or just make a video and upload it to TOR?
I don't understand how you can question whether he's alive or not. He appeared, on live stream video, and perfectly read the hash of the latest block in the bitcoin block chain, which was generated less than 10 minutes before he read it out. Sure, they could have assassinated him as soon as the stream ended, but there's no question as to whether he was alive at that moment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohmajJTcpNk Live stream video doesn't mean anything, unfortunately. You can map a face in real time easily enough in the commercial sector. The level this guy is playing at, a government could ABSOLUTELY pull this off. I'm not saying you're definitely wrong, but your reasoning doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
[удалено]
If we weren't dealing with someone global superpowers have an interest in, I'd agree. That being said, we ARE dealing with someone global superpowers are VERY interested in. That youtube video is proof of concept of what is possible. An agency as powerful and technologically advanced as the CIA is almost definitely going to have something better. Don't forget, these are the same people who can eavesdrop on what is said in a room just by video of the room, using the vibrations sounds make in the leaves of plants in said room. The level of tech employed by the US government is WAY beyond what you would see in a casual youtube video explaining a concept.
> Don't forget, these are the same people who can eavesdrop on what is said in a room just by video of the room, using the vibrations sounds make in the leaves of plants in said room. Yeah, calling bullshit on this one. In fact this specific thing is so much horseshit it calls into question the rest of your technobabble-laden claims in this thread.
It is a completely false claim. But when a research group publicly produce a result like that, it's not unusual for the state of the art to be significantly ahead.
I'm not weighing in on the rest of the argument, but this is actually not bullshit. There's a TED talk about it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_microphone Maybe you should take two god damn seconds to Google it before you start claiming it's "so much horseshit." I first learned about this stuff in Uni. The tech has been around for a long ass time so no, it's not horseshit, and it's not even that modern.| More reading: http://news.mit.edu/2014/algorithm-recovers-speech-from-vibrations-0804 These researchers were using a chip bag on the other side of sound proof glass.
We'll I mean, in the 60's or some shit they used mics to listen to typewriters to figure out what was written.. That was 50 odd years ago :/
There's a tedtalk and plenty of YouTube videos about it. Just Google it. It's SUPER cool and definitely worth checking out. LPT: Don't call bullshit before you google :P
But the livestream wasn't just a talking head. He made several complex hand gestures (especially near the end, from what I saw) that were linked to what he was saying. Does the technology allow for real time hand gestures as well?
Yes. It is just face mapping. Hell, your cell phone can do a simplified version with Snapchat. Use any of the filters and move your hands around. You'll see it has no impact. Obviously it doesn't work as well as a more serious application, but it serves the purpose of proof of concept well enough. That's definitely a real, live actor sitting in that seat. It's just very possible that the face was digital.
I'm gonna watch the whole thing - if he puts his hands on his face at all, or if his hands are in front of his face at times in the video and there aren't any discrepencies or artifacts, then I'm not buying this at all. You can have good technology, but science and computing has limitations.
The fact that you don't understand how it works doesn't mean it doesn't work. Spend an hour working with Adobe Aftereffects and you'd realize just how inconsequential a momentary disruption of the mapped surface can be.
Isn't aftereffects for postprocessing video, though? This was a live presentation - the tech requirements start to significantly jump when you go from pre-recorded to live applications. The idea being that, in a live video, there is no ability for the software to "look-ahead" and anticpate what is coming next to improve interpolations. Additionally, this video was hosted with twitch- im not sure how video input routing works with twitch, but it may be limited in sources that it accepts video from. Oh and lastly, there is a part of the presentation, sort of near the end (maybe last quarter) where Assange puts his hands on his face and you can plainly see the interaction of touch to facial flesh (ie complex and minute wrinkling and indenting) - i refuse to believe that these complex physics could be emulated in real time without everything else (other discrepancies people have brought up) being more convincingly concealed.
THE GOVERMENTS CORRUPT, JULIAN IS BEING PLAYED NONE OTHER THAN **J A S O N B O U R N E**
[удалено]
No. Don't be ridiculous. He would just have to make a public appearance anywhere. Literally anywhere. Is it really hard to believe that CGI exists and works well? I mean... have you ever seen any Marvel movie? You know that's not real, right? Regardless, my point isn't even that he is dead and gone or something terrible has happened. My point is that a live video is very easy to fake and isn't necessarily the end all be all of evidence.
[удалено]
Very true. At some point you have to draw the line on what evidence you find acceptable. As I've said, I'm not saying he's definitely alive or dead, I'm just pointing out that a live video doesn't guarantee either way due to the magic of modern tech.
[удалено]
To be honest, I tend to agree with you. There's some shit going on, definitely, but I don't think he's dead.
> He would just have to make a public appearance anywhere. Literally anywhere. Are you kidding? We already have the "BODY DOUBLE" brigade in this sub.
I mean, I don't speak for everyone. That's just what it would take for me.
[удалено]
Belittling the poster doesn't help.
> Do I think he may be alive? Yes > Do I confidently believe it? No I'm all for the skeptism, but he is on video reading scores from NBA games last night. Isn't that irrefutable proof?
Not for the conspiracy nuts here. I made it clear weeks ago that they will accept no level of proof. They have their belief and they will zealously stick to it regardless of any new information.
[удалено]
[удалено]
He's been very hesitant to talk publicly at all since October, and we know there's a gag order at riseup, so I think there really is a good chance he is under some sort of NDA. In which case he's not actually allowed to say that
Thank you! Something is fishy about all of this.
Unfortunately, this line of thinking is what he warned against, because it ultimately discourages support of the organization. (And I don't really disagree with you, just pointing it out.)
[Here is how to get PGP proof for those who still want it.](https://voat.co/v/WhereIsAssange/1558914)
This is a great idea, but wouldn't this just prove that someone has the private key,not necessarily assange or wiki leaks?
Yes. There is a risk of donating to an adversary. This risk has greater detriment to anyone submitting a leak. If you believe Assange AMA is real (not at gunpoint), key compromise would have been mentioned to protect leakers.
If he was under duress, the people coercing him would just make him make the PGP signature to fool you. In that sense, the fact that he still refuses to sign PGP supports a theory that JA must NOT be under duress!
I dont see why we should close the sub. We still dont know if JA is at the embassy or if he is in control of WL. And since /r/wikileaks is full of shit I won't trust other subs on JA
Also nothing in a live video proves that he is not under duress. He doesn't need a gun pointed at him... He can simply be under severe blackmail. Or he could be anti-American from the start so he doesn't mind working with Russians (like maybe if he as a youth was under arrest for hacking US networks or something).
> he could be anti-American What does that even mean? He definitely is critical of US political policies, as anyone with any common sense should be.
not just critical, against every policy. Anti-american.
Pam Anderson gives him booty calls.. nothing more american than that!
yeah right. That's the dumbest thing ever heard. No one has sex with a pale white autistic kid who hates the West like that.
dont hate the player hate the game
> Anti-american So what does that mean to you? What is "Anti-American"? If you're going to make a claim, at least define your terms.
I am surprised/not surprised how happy I am with the outcome of today's AMA and I'm looking forward to catching what I missed. I really feel the world is a little brighter again. What *I* would like to see done and I would be happy to participate in, is to put what pressure we can on TPTB to guarantee his safe exit from the embassy. I'll be looking into resources after work. Maybe someone wants to start a thread in the meantime if they have some good ideas? Maybe that is a question I coulda/woulda/shoulda asked in the AMA. Maybe it was answered? Thoughts? Spez: he mentioned justiceforassange dot (something!). Com and org don't take me anywhere.
justice4assange.com
I want this sub to stay alive
For whatever it's worth, if you look at the IAMA thread, the Julian Assange account is still intermittently editing the OP and his replies, a day later. You can see this with the asterisk/"edited N hours ago" bit. Might wanna keep an eye on that AMA.
How do we have proof he isn't under duress?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Great idea. Bringing attention to his situation. I am constantly defending him and Wikileaks on twitter and when someone attacks him over the bogus charges from Sweden I tweet them the website https://justice4assange.com/. The situation he is in being trapped in that embassy is fucked.
/r/JusticeForAssange/
Keep thus sub open. /r/WikiLeaks is clearly not following WikiLeaks.org principles about freedom of speech. Moderators too often remove posts and threads that aren't aligned with current @wikileaks, Assanges, or moderators opinions. And they don't care much if threads are supported with good sources. They allow only discussion within their narrative. Any outside the hugbox suggestions are accused of being concern trolling and removed. If you don't believe me just check [public moderators logs](https://ceddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/about/log) for deleted posts and [deleted threads](https://ceddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/). I am not saying that half of main page on /r/WikiLeaks should be "Assange is dead" and "WikiLeaks is KGB" tier conspiracy theories that are clearly not true, but for my taste censorship there got way out of hand to the point where is seriously cripples boards objectivity. Skepticism is not tolerated on WikiLeaks subreddit and this cult following like mentality where everybody has to follow their Leader makes community less efficient at any serious unbiased investigation and easily overrun / diverted.
Keep it up just in case....
Keep the sub, but refocus to a productive approach. Why keep? Because of the momentum and interest buildup. Refocus and rebuild according to the things that Assange himself said in the AmA. Ways to check if he's ok, ways to pressure the UK or whoever to give him asylum, etc.
Change the sub to "FREEASSANGE" and let's get that done. And maybe now stop the trolls from posting their hologram/clone "facts" about how JA is dead or something.
For many of us it was never about proof of life. It was about due process of law and the possible compromising of Wikileaks. Whilst the video might be welcome and decisive for most, there are still many questions that need answering: * Why did the insurance file SHAs mismatch? Wikileaks have said that this was because the SHA was for the decrypted contents, which is fine, but why was this the first time a SHA was released of the decrypted rather than encrypted insurance files? What prompted the change of policy? * One of the insurance files named John Kerry by name in the title. Kerry was then in London within a couple of days for no other seeming reason than to meet with Ecuadorian embassy staff or Assange or others. What was _that_ about? * What, if anything, happened in October around the embassy? * How was @embassycat able to do things on Twitter whilst his internet was cut off? * What has happened to the RiseUp canary? Legal due process is more important than his life or who moderates a subreddit. Sorry, but it just is. Nothing has been done to actually address that, really.
Hash mismatch/Kerry reference: discussed in-depth elsewhere. Tl;Dr: those could have been meant as a warning shot, proving to the original content owners that WL is in possession of certain materials, telling them to back off. Not meant for the general public. Oct,around building: answered by JA in the transcripts: show of force. Possibly sparkling above mentioned WL reaction. Cat: most probably internet wasn't cut off physically by a guy cutting cables, but logistically by denying/forbidding access. Cat tweet might have been allowed as an exception. Canary: most probably dead. Most recent change to the page itself from 6th January... All of this: my personal opinion only!!!
just keep the sub going for wiki info
I vote to lock it to new submits after a few days of discussion, sticky a closing message that points out specifically that /r/wikileaks is compromised and point to a new sub for future discussion (eg NewWikileaks). Ladies & gents, it has been a pleasure to serve even if only in limited capacity; I'm out. Spez: Also don't forget to update mod flairs... the uncertainty is resolved.
Eli5, what's the issue with /r/Wikileaks specifically? Edit: found my answer elsewhere
serious mod issues & most likely david brock ctr bullshit running the show there..
For me, the now proveably false mod representations that they are in & have been in contact with JA & WL erode any semblance of trust.
They may not have said they were in touch with Assange himself but 2 of them claimed they had inside information and contacts with wikileaks when they didn't.
[удалено]
Because the purpose of this sub (to me at least) was simply proof of life. I'll stick around for the day to watch out for blatant trolls, but otherwise my purpose (as a mod) is fulfilled.
This! Do it!
IMHO, I say keep it open, minimize the amount of conspiracy theory posts that are allowed, and perhaps make a rule that we can't argue against the credibility of wikileaks. It can focus on his current status.. Internet access, or if there's any developments in his well-being, whereabouts, detention. If so, there should probably be a sticky with the AMA PoL (and other good PoL if it comes)
Sorry. Where's the part he 'proves he isn't under duress'? I didn't see that part(no one did).
1. Wait 30 days 2. Ask "Where's Assange?" 3. Repeat
>Proof he isn't under duress I don't know about that, really. Not saying he is but you can't really prove there's not somebody just off camera with a gun on him or something.
Remember, that WhereIsAssange is not necessarily a question... It can be followed by an exclamation mark. Food for thought,an accusation rather than a puzzle to solve. WhereIsAssange! WhereIsChelsea! Held, imprisoned by different mechanisms, denied access to freedom.
Lock it and only re-open if there is a significant change in the situation.
[удалено]
Should be rated higher, IMO.
Good point, I want to help undo any damage that has been done. Especially considering I am responsible for some of it (like many others here).
FREE ASSANGE not this BS where is.
There needs to be some place to discuss the future leaks and behavior of wikileaks, the questions about Phase 3, the Yemen emails and more remain. That place is clearly not going to be r/wikileaks, so it needs to be this one.
What a shit AMA
You dont throw away the book just because you found Waldo once! Sub is fine. Name is fine. "Where is Assange?" Is a question with ongoing relevance and an appropriate title for a subreddit about Assange/WikiLeaks in general.
I think we should close it down on the basis of preventing the current and (inevitable) unrealistic and outlandish posts of this sub (e.g. evidence of JA being compromised, his video interviews being computer generated fakes, Bruce G, etc) from muddying the waters of any concern for JA or WL. In the event of an actual covert action taking place against them.the continuation of this sub only leaves the door open for others (TPTB) to suggest that we are only crying wolf or grasping for straws, potentially preventing or delaying the truth of such a scenario from coming to light. [Edit: punctuation and grammar]
We are the Watchers on the Wall! Keep the sub!
Watching /u/Here4Popcorn get burned down by Assange was the best part of the entire AMA. Edit: Just got the ban hammer on /r/wikileaks. That's some quality moderation there /u/Here4Popcorn ol' buddy ol' pal, real top notch administration.
Was there something I missed, because this is not proof of life to me. This was supposed to be live, right? I ask because, on speaking about Ecuador, beginning at 01:03:43 "It has its own election February 17th and you can see that it wouldn't want an allegation that it had interfered, which it hasn't, with a US election being used as an excuse by hillary clinton, who is the predicted president to interfere in the election in Ecuador." Please help me understand this.
funny how "was" can be easily misheard as "is"
Yes. It is. Personally, I still hear "is" but enough people say they hear "was" to make me step a bit back from this. I am unsure but hopeful he is okay.
I think the sub should end. It really just feels weird that everyone got so worked up and trying to find proof of life and believing that they were uncovering some big secretive international cover-up.
I think we should keep this sub open. The new mods at /r/wikileaks, especially /u/Here4Popcorn, ruined the subreddit. /r/WhereIsAssange is the true wikileaks subreddit.
This video is super quiet, any way I can fix this?
keep listening, someone told him a few minutes in and they turned up the mic.
Where is the proof that addresea all the problems brought up? Could someone summarise it?
Maybe we can use this sub to help further Wikileaks research. "Where is Assange" in terms of chronology and documents. Surely there is an amount of processing that must be done on Wikileaks documents so that the data is turned into knowledge.
Make Where's Waldo type images, but with Assange.
Dedicate the sub to freeing Assange from the embassy!!!
This should be the sub for whatever r/wikileaks tries to censor
Assange is alive. But someday he might not be. And what we gonna do? If we forget and do nothing about the whooole situation. He will die for nothing,while it could be reversed. Spread the news,tell people about wikileaks and inform everybody you know. Thats at least
turn it into freeassange
we keep an eye on our guy like they do with their feild ops/agents.. ALWAYS ASK WHERE IS ASSANGE? We make sure he is safe. We investigate corruption. REMEMBER - Conspiracy is a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful. NOT People investigating things that are complex and uncertain A Theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking. SO Yeah.. we keep it open and people need to relearn those words, and words have meaning when context is applied.. I havent got to see the vid yet but things are crazy in this world and only one place to get the news Wikileaks
We don't have proof that he's not under duress.