Julian Assange's old website, IQ.org (pre-Wikileaks)

I have great sympathy for anyone such as JA brave enough not only to blow a whistle, but to publish as much as he has.

The above posts reveal him to be quite bright. However, Mendax is Latin for "liar"; Tarpley pointed that out too. Lying is well known to be associated with sociopathic or psychopathic personalities. Here's another summary of the psychopathic personality, into which he seems to fit rather well IMO.

If he'd simply remained another whistleblower with his own radical website, he wouldn't have attracted the attention he has. So IMO who he is and what his background is is less important than what he has actually managed to release to the world. Here is where the matter is largely out of his hands. It depends on what is fed to him, and this in turn is affected by any one of a number of ways these sources can be manipulated.

A good place to begin reading about these influences is Cass Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule's 2008 paper at Harvard Law School entitled Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures. The original paper may be downloaded here or here.

Quote:

---

Abstract:
Many millions of people hold conspiracy theories; they believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event. A recent example is the belief, widespread in some parts of the world, that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out not by Al Qaeda, but by Israel or the United States. Those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law. The first challenge is to understand the mechanisms by which conspiracy theories prosper; the second challenge is to understand how such theories might be undermined. Such theories typically spread as a result of identifiable cognitive blunders, operating in conjunction with informational and reputational influences. A distinctive feature of conspiracy theories is their self-sealing quality. Conspiracy theorists are not likely to be persuaded by an attempt to dispel their theories; they may even characterize that very attempt as further proof of the conspiracy. Because those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology, in accordance with which it is rational to hold such theories, the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups. Various policy dilemmas, such as the question whether it is better for government to rebut conspiracy theories or to ignore them, are explored in this light.

Keywords: conspiracy theories, social networks, informational cascades, group polarization

---

I chose to underline cognitive infiltration as this implies using cognitive dissonance, as discussed in the PA thread Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars. Tarpley misquoted this as cognitive disruption in his interview with Alex Jones, though the outcome is the same.

See also here for an introduction to his "theory".

Fortunately, Sunstein and Vermeule haven't got it all their way.

Quote:

---

David Ray Griffin may not be a household name, but he is one of the best-known and most respected figures in the 9/11 Truth Movement, as well as a respected theologian and professor emeritus. Griffin’s previous books on 9/11, including The New Pearl Harbor, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, and Debunking 9/11 Debunking have made him the pre-eminent scholar of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Griffin’s latest book, Cognitive Infiltration: An Obama Appointee’s Plan to Undermine the 9/11 Conspiracy Theory is a response to and rebuttal of legal scholar and Obama appointee Cass Sunstein’s paper, “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures,” which discusses how to break up so-called “9/11 conspiracy theory groups” from within through covert infiltration. Griffin is a master at breaking down complicated evidence for the layman; and here he thoroughly deconstructs and exposes the fraudulent nature of Sunstein’s call for what is essentially an illegal operation. Written with a slightly humorous approach, this factually accurate new book is an engaging read on a difficult subject.

---

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SBProg...n/message/6085
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...t=va&aid=21253

It could be argued that JA's initial contributors did so voluntarily, but as the trickle became a flood, it becomes obvious that bigger players were not slow to take advantage of the faith placed in him and Wikileaks by the vast multitude not in the know.

Thanks zook for your posts on this aspect of Wikileaks.

I'm also surprised that in this excellent thread no one has yet raised the matter of his association with The Family, a cult run by Anne-Hamilton Byrne. This was alluded to by Webster Tarpley in the interview mentioned in my earlier post above.

Quote:

---

Reportedly, Julian, together with his mother Claire and his half-brother, spent his childhood fleeing the father of Julian's half-brother.

That father was a member of a cult, called The Family, run by a Anne-Hamilton Byrne.

Anne-Hamilton Byrne ran her 'child-kidnapping cult' on the outskirts of Melbourne.

"Byrne dyed the stolen children’s hair blonde and fed them LSD." (Julian Assange of WikiLeaks: “Destroyer of Worlds)

"The Santiniketan Park Association of Anne Hamilton-Byrne conditioned children with drugs, sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation, torture and ritual sexual abuse in order to produce subjects who bent to the will of the group’s leader." (Wiki of the Damned)

"Assange claims that Australian intelligence has advised him, and there is an apparent link between Australian intelligence and the cult." (Wiki of the Damned)

Australian intelligence works closely with the CIA and Mossad.

---

http://nona-people.blogspot.com/2010...n-assange.html

Quote:

---

Byrne was the leader of a cult, The Family, discovered in the Dandenong Ranges in the early 1980s. There were 14 children in the cult, who were treated abominably, and taught that they were all Byrne's children. All of them had their hair dyed blonde (the police finally caught up with the cult in 1987).

Assange won't discuss the link with Byrne. He says only: ''My mother was never in a cult. I was never in a cult.''

My question about his own white hair goes nowhere. However, Assange told me when we first talked (we have several conversations), that his hair went white at 15.

''I was very blond until 12-ish, until puberty. I built a cathode ray tube at 15, at school, and connected it backwards. The Geiger counter went 1000, 2000, 3000, 40,000. That was about the time. Also I had some head scans, because I had something like viral encephalitis. It was very mild. I just lost feeling in one cheek. Earlier on, at nine, I'd had head X-rays because I'd headbutted a giant earth ball.''

---

http://www.theage.com.au/national/ke...0521-w230.html

Quote:

---

So what makes Julian tick? As a psychologist my interest lies in history, as this is frequently re-enacted in our lives. Julian's parents were in travelling theatre and he attended 37 schools. After his parents separated his mother's new partner was involved in the infamous cult of Anne Hamilton-Byrne, from which the family eventually fled and went into hiding for some years.

I encountered Hamilton-Byrne and her brood of stolen children (later revealed to be drugged, starved and abused) at the Melbourne Siddah Yoga Ashram in the 1980s. Her illegally adopted children were eerily obedient and surreal, swathed in white with silvered blond hair that was not unlike the silver hair of the now notorious Assange.

These children were imprisoned in thinly veiled secrecy, lies and corruption. The cult was allowed to thrive for many years until it was finally exposed in 1987 and Hamilton-Byrne and her partner charged with conspiracy to defraud. A police raid released the children still being held there.

From this thumbnail sketch Julian's life emerges as involving dislocation, disrupted attachments, fragmented relationships and possible abuse linked to the cult and his stepfather. He seems to have been in hiding and on the move for much of his life. With his mother, he experienced, then fled from, a cult of abuse, lies and secrecy.

When asked recently about his core values he responded he stated that he was inspired by his father. 'Capable generous men do not create victims they nurture victims. I'm combative, not so big on the nurture but you can nurture in other ways. By policing perpetrators of crime.'

---

http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=24468

So str8thinker what do you think all of the above if true implies in regards to the released information ?

So, Julian went to Harvard? j u l i e n @ post.harvard.edu....A known CIA operations base....why the mis-spelling? Is he Julien or Julian?

Quote:

---

So str8thinker what do you think all of the above if true implies in regards to the released information ?

---

If you are asking how do I think what we know about him influences the information he has released, I would say he relishes playing his cards very close to his chest, not letting the right hand know what his left is doing. This duplicity is part of his basic nature. Since he is at the head of his organization I guess he made the final decisions on which material should be released and the timing of the release, but he cannot release anything he hasn't got, so it depends on the influence, goodwill and generosity of his contacts. That's where the weakness lies.

In view of the latest, relatively low-key nature of the information, I would be surprised if his "backup cache" contains many real surprises, and how many of these may have been carefully doctored by his informants.

Quote:

---

Posted by str8thinker

If you are asking how do I think what we know about him influences the information he has released, I would say he relishes playing his cards very close to his chest, not letting the right hand know what his left is doing. This duplicity is part of his basic nature. Since he is at the head of his organization I guess he made the final decisions on which material should be released and the timing of the release, but he cannot release anything he hasn't got, so it depends on the influence, goodwill and generosity of his contacts. That's where the weakness lies.

In view of the latest, relatively low-key nature of the information, I would be surprised if his "backup cache" contains many real surprises, and how many of these may have been carefully doctored by his informants.

---

You are aware that he gave ALL of the latest cables untouched to multiple media outlets to discern independently of wiki.So he has no influence what so ever over how these outlets interpret the information and when they release it ?

Yes the backup cache certainly must have a few people worried.

I think it's a bold statement to suggest that this backup cache has no real surprises and has carefully doctored and planted information in it without any proof what so ever.

What is your opinion of Openleaks ?

Thanks for the heads-up, ponda.

No, I wasn't aware that Assange gave all his stuff away to be distributed how and when the media see fit.

Quote:

---

I think it's a bold statement to suggest that this backup cache has no real surprises and has carefully doctored and planted information in it without any proof what so ever.

---

Agreed, that's just my opinion after seeing the contents of the last massive release. Some minor surprises that will upset local politicians. I would love to see something major in it, for example some truth about 9/11, UFO disclosure, HAARP or even Solar Warden. But I won't be holding my breath.

Thanks, I wasn't aware of Openleaks till you mentioned it. The modus operandi of these groups is slowly changing since Julian started the ball rolling.

Quote:

---

According to the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter, the new site will be called "OpenLeaks," and like its predecessor, will allow whistleblowers to leak information to the public anonymously. However, the new site will differ in that it won't be responsible for hosting the information itself directly for the public eye, but will instead act as an intermediary between whistleblowers and media organisations.

---

http://www.thisdayonline.info/nview.php?id=189757

We'll have to wait and see. The proliferation of new groups will create much employment and make them harder to shut down; unfortunately this will also make it easier for the PTB to divide and conquer.

Quote:

---

Posted by str8thinker

The above posts reveal him to be quite bright. However, Mendax is Latin for "liar"; Tarpley pointed that out too. Lying is well known to be associated with sociopathic or psychopathic personalities. Here's another summary of the psychopathic personality, into which he seems to fit rather well IMO.

---

When I was younger I had an online handle that meant "fox" in Japanese. Foxes are well known to be associated with cleverness and trickery, and cannot be trusted. Does this mean that I cannot be trusted? By that logic, presumably.

Don't get me wrong - I definitely think it's wise to keep an open mind about Julian Assange and his intentions, but not when people resort to slippery slope arguments and borderline ad hominem attacks related to things he did when he was young.

great thread!

the wikileaks saga is one I have been watching closely with great interest as the various challenges it proposes to the global society is profound and will touch on so many different pillars supporting civil liberties and I feel that before this saga plays out, we will see this saga as a centerpiece of global change

who is wikileaks and are they legit?

judging by the many differing competing narratives alive and evolving which in almost in all cases wikileaks is painted as bad, makes me want to give them the benefit of the doubt and see how it all plays out without making judgment (like I have any real data to make such a judgment anyway as there is a flood of speculation only).

There is a MS media push to paint him as terrorist, spy, and immortal womanizer all the while there is an alternative media push to demonize them as CIA front, controlled demolition of the free information architecture, or a stunt to give big brother a valid reason in the eyes of the sheep to gain control of the free internet which the controllers must be salivating over

while there is a steadily growing minority opinion that this is the real deal and just one element of many manifestations occurring in the world today in efforts to take down the bully and finally bring peace to the world

I don't pretend to know and will not be so foolish to just decide on a belief just so I have one, so I am undecided as to what place wikileaks holds in this grand theater

yet I am delighted that:

-whistle blower is becoming a mainstream buzz word

-the world's elite are ever increasingly going under the microscope in MS media

-the alternative media has captured the worlds attention including main stream outlets (an ever increasing trend and I think MS media ownership changed 2 years ago - or tactics changed direction)

-it is becoming a popular trend to distrust ruling institutions and corporations enough to question instead of accept

-being a conspiracy theorist or researcher is becoming the new coolness

-people are talking and the silent (or silenced) majority are finding a voice and bravery in numbers

-there are ever increasing routes for insider testimony to reach public scrutiny, while also escaping the "fringe" label


As to the rumored dismissal of the 911 truth movement as annoying by Mr. Assange well that is an intriguing story all on its own as this rumor was started in July of 2010 if have my facts straight, and could have been the spearheading attack made that did the most damage to wikileaks in the conspiracy corners of the internet. He did the Ted Show appearance and then right around a week later the rumor burst out on the conspiracy scene in a matter of a few short days by going viral after the Alex Jones show and Rense picked it up and Wayne Madsen ran with it. The origin of this rumor may have been this article: Wanted by the CIA: Julian Assange - Wikileaks founder I have not seen nor found any video clips of him saying this (nor in any other interviews for that matter) and we must trust Matthew Bell that he did say so I presume.

Since then there has been division in the conspiracy circles over the legitimacy of the messenger while the message gets drowned out by the overwhelming emotional noise created by this division. Classic hegelian dialectic crap that has been working against humanity since who knows when, and still works like a charm on you and me today.

all this damage control and competing narratives over something not real or threatening?

hmmm

interesting times indeed

I've done some more research on Wikileaks, and here's my current view:

I grew up in hacker culture (not that I would ever admit to hacking a computer :-) and the idea was always that information was free -- not that it should be free, but it was free because it cannot be contained.

I'm quite impressed about their technical/legal architecture and that they have teamed up with the legendary Chaos Computer Club in Germany.

My take is that if their current leaks have not been "authorized" then there will be unauthorized leaks shortly. Someone who is in possession of secret material will eventually take the liberty to leak it, and Wikileaks will make it all too easy for them.

It will be very difficult for such organizations to be inflitrated as most of the personality types in them are not in it for money and are fiercely independent.

In addition, they cannot be shut down, short of shutting down the whole internet which is impossible. They could be temporarily censored, but the information will still make the rounds, albeit slower with censorship. And, even if they find a way to pull the plug on Wikileaks, it appears there's a bunch of other organizations vying to replace them, such as Openleaks.

I think this will be a very interesting story to watch.

--sjkted

Quote:

---

Posted by Bill Ryan

Not very useful information! :)

(This doesn't qualify as research data: impossible for anyone to check, only feeds rumors, and might not be true or accurate.)

---

Agreed and I wished to highlight this rumor as something desparately in need of fact-checking. I have tried to find a source documenting that, in fact, Assange actually said this and am unable to locate it. I suspect that this is a rumor planted to undermine the Wikileaks brand and Assange personally. The two main things that seem to piss off people in the alternative news panopticon are 1.) the IDEA that Assange has discounted theories countering the official 911 narrative and 2.) the iDEA that Assange is pro-Israel (implying he is working for international, coordinated activities of 3-letter agencies) - This is an example of the damaging effect of unsubstantiated allegations, similar to accusing someone of being a child-molester. Both smears are based on Assange's not taking a public position on what his theories are concerning 911 and the "fact" that none of the cables thus released tend to shed a negative light on the State of Israel. I am not able to find any public statements Assange has specifically made concerning his theories about 911. With respect to the released cable info not revealing anything damaging to the interests of Israel that is not true. Some of the information has been damaging. The problem here is that less than 1,000 of 260,000 cables have been released to the public. I am willing to as Bill would say "Bet My Hat" that not ONE PERSON ON THIS FORUM HAS PERSONALLY READ all the documents released thus far and that includes me!! Further, there are about 259,000 documents yet to be released!! How will anyone individually be able to analyze this torrent of information? How will ANYONE be able to come to any kind of informed and intelligent conclusion about the contents? There is plenty of room for spin for anyone in all of this. The information overload has exceeded our capacity to deal with it responsibly!

I am increasingly concerned that unless a firm commitment is made in the alternative news sources to Truth (including basic journalistic techniques such as FACT CHECKING) all we are doing is becoming part of the problem instead of part of the solution. Although of course I believe in the importance of freedom to express one's personal opinion, intelligent and mature people should realize that doing so is only meaningful if one actually gives thought to what is said, (acting socially responsibly) i.e. not engaging in unsubstantiated attacks on others, scrupulous fact-checking, combined with respect for others. Lacking those elements our discourse is no better, and in fact may be much worse than the spectacle we see on FAUX news.........................

Regardless of the difficulty in discerning the TRUTH it is still a core value and must be borne in mind at all times when conversing with others in any media.

This is why in ancient texts people were admonished to attend to the important task of improving one's character. A human being without exemplary character is not working at full capacity and is, therefor subject to manipulation and doomed to a life of abject slavery.
Frankly, folks - we need to take our discourse to a higher level or it really is not helping anything in fact it is hurting because it is contributing to the confusion and divide and conquer tactics employed by the other side - in the name of freedom of speech etc.

Unless participants in this information band-width ascend collectively and voluntarily to a higher level, it is not serving any higher purpose than chit-chat and perhaps should be abandoned altogether.

Quote:

---

Posted by Heretic

while there is a steadily growing minority opinion that this is the real deal and just one element of many manifestations occurring in the world today in efforts to take down the bully and finally bring peace to the world

---

Good post Heretic

From what i have seen perusing some online readers comments and opinion polls it appears that the vast majority of the general public are behind Wiki and the release of the information and they also think that Wiki should not be shut down at all.

In a smh.com.au poll out of about 20,000 respondents about 18,000 were behind wiki and thought that no attempts to shut it down should be made.


Poll link: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...8poe.html#poll

"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence and thereby eventually lose all ability to defend ourselves and those we love"

Houman,

Excellent synopsis.

In other words, and a more crude analysis - we become desensitised

@CosmicLagoon:

Quote:

---

When I was younger I had an online handle that meant "fox" in Japanese. Foxes are well known to be associated with cleverness and trickery, and cannot be trusted. Does this mean that I cannot be trusted? By that logic, presumably.

Don't get me wrong - I definitely think it's wise to keep an open mind about Julian Assange and his intentions, but not when people resort to slippery slope arguments and borderline ad hominem attacks related to things he did when he was young.

---

I wish to make it clear that my comments about JA's childhood were not meant to be taken as an ad hominem attack, even though I have much less respect for someone who is proud to name himself a "liar" rather than a "fox".

Now that I know a little more about JA's background I feel he is exactly the right man for the time and place in which he finds himself. Lesser men bearing the excruciating cruelty of such a childhood would not have made it this far. His childhood certainly prepared him for his later life and, as such cannot be reversed. His bed was made for him and now he will have to lie in it.

I am convinced that even I share traits with Mr.Assange and Gary McKinnon.

Regardless, both should be protected as they are the true guardians of the truth.

Quote:

---

Posted by Houman

"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence and thereby eventually lose all ability to defend ourselves and those we love"

---

Many thanks, Houman:

Julian Assange wrote this in January 2007.

Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence and thereby eventually lose all ability to defend ourselves and those we love. In a modern economy it is impossible to seal oneself off from injustice.

If we have brains or courage, then we are blessed and called on not to frit these qualities away, standing agape at the ideas of others, winning pissing contests, improving the efficiencies of the neocorporate state, or immersing ourselves in obscuranta, but rather to prove the vigor of our talents against the strongest opponents of love we can find.

If we can only live once, then let it be a daring adventure that draws on all our powers. Let it be with similar types whose hearts and heads we may be proud of. Let our grandchildren delight to find the start of our stories in their ears but the endings all around in their wandering eyes.

The whole universe or the structure that perceives it is a worthy opponent, but try as I may I can not escape the sound of suffering. Perhaps as an old man I will take great comfort in pottering around in a lab and gently talking to students in the summer evening and will accept suffering with insouciance. But not now; men in their prime, if they have convictions are tasked to act on them.

-- Julian Assange, 03 Jan 2007

Good morning Houman, the Earth says hello!

Quote:

---

Posted by Houman

"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence and thereby eventually lose all ability to defend ourselves and those we love"

---

I'm a bit disappointed in your post (after having read Bill's post below where he puts the quote's context back in, including authorship). I had thought those were your own words, not Julian Assange's. It's a fine line between creative presentation of another's words and plagiarism. Merely putting quotation marks around a quote may or may not protect you from the ugly charge of plagiarism; but it cannot escape the smell of deception (even if a passing odor).

I wonder if people realize the multitude of ways in which cognitive dissonance delivers itself?

In this case, we are first encouraged to rally around the message removed from the messenger; then the messenger is made known (of course, Bill was merely reporting from his own knowledgebase; but Houman knew the identity of the messenger and did not reveal it although it was his responsibility to do so). Was it an oversight on Houman's part? Sure ... anything's possible. Probable? As probable as flying pigs being backypigged by 500-lb canaries! (IMHO, and I'd venture in the opinion of most here who are used to the practice of quoting people). Finally, the people rally around the messenger with the great message. See how dissociation from one's repugnance to evil is achieved?

The main difference between this message and the message in the Mein Kampf ... is that this message is in the purported duty of good, while that message was in the duty of evil. Nonetheless, that message resonated with the people. Hitler merely rode this resonance to its logical ends ... evil message to evil ends. Assange's good message is in the duty of Assange's evil assoCIAtions.

Humble opinions all around.

:typing:

ps: I thought about removing my thanks from your post; but my better wisdom advised me that that would be rewriting the historical record (of your deception and my falling for it). If that's how I reacted in the moment; then that's how it shall be recorded when all is said and done.

ps2: A message is only as good as its context.

Hi Zookumar,

The quotation marks were indicative of the fact that I was "quoting" someone.
I somehow hoped that someone will find out who (given that the quote was taken out of the front page of the website referenced in title of this tread , were my expectations too high? :doh:)
I am happy that Bill did...

Quote:

---

Posted by zookumar

Good morning Houman, the Earth says hello!



I'm a bit disappointed in your post (after having read Bill's post below where he puts the quote's context back in, including authorship). I had thought those were your own words, not Julian Assange's. It's a fine line between creative presentation of another's words and plagiarism. Merely putting quotation marks around a quote may or may not protect you from the ugly charge of plagiarism; but it cannot escape the smell of deception (even if a passing odor).

I wonder if people realize the multitude of ways in which cognitive dissonance delivers itself?

In this case, we are first encouraged to rally around the message removed from the messenger; then the messenger is made known (of course, Bill was merely reporting from his own knowledgebase; but Houman knew the identity of the messenger and did not reveal it although it was his responsibility to do so). Was it an oversight on Houman's part? Sure ... anything's possible. Probable? As probable as flying pigs being backypigged by 500-lb canaries! (IMHO, and I'd venture in the opinion of most here who are used to the practice of quoting people). Finally, the people rally around the messenger with the great message. See how dissociation from one's repugnance to evil is achieved?

The main difference between this message and the message in the Mein Kampf ... is that this message is in the purported duty of good, while that message was in the duty of evil. Nonetheless, that message resonated with the people. Hitler merely rode this resonance to its logical ends ... evil message to evil ends. Assange's good message is in the duty of Assange's evil assoCIAtions.

Humble opinions all around.

:typing:

ps: I thought about removing my thanks from your post; but my better wisdom advised me that that would be rewriting the historical record (of your deception and my falling for it). If that's how I reacted in the moment; then that's how it shall be recorded when all is said and done.

ps2: A message is only as good as its context.

---

I think Houman was well intentioned. I didn't perceive it as a quote, but upon second glance.... it is in quotes. Maybe it was late. Makes me want to go back and edit my posts - lol. God only knows what I may have done in the late or wee hours? We're all human, Houman :hug: