Are you actually suggesting blind acceptance of what he says is better than having doubts and critically examining what he says? I didn't say he was incapable of saying something true, just that his past behavior does not inspire much confidence in his motives and the accuracy of what he claims.
I also didn't say he was absolutely guilty (hence my use of the word "alleged" just that his response to the charges are very suspicious and there is reason to suspect the Swedes have more than the claims of the women.
I have seen his little herd of sheep post some very disgusting things and make a lot of assumptions based on hearsay and slavish worship of a man with severe moral inconsistencies. This self righteous arrogance he and they display is right up there with a religious nut who is devoid of doubt and reason.
Are you actually suggesting blind acceptance of what he says is better than having doubts and critically examining what he says? I didn't say he was incapable of saying something true, just that his past behavior does not inspire much confidence in his motives and the accuracy of what he claims.
I also didn't say he was absolutely guilty (hence my use of the word "alleged" just that his response to the charges are very suspicious and there is reason to suspect the Swedes have more than the claims of the women.
I have seen his little herd of sheep post some very disgusting things and make a lot of assumptions based on hearsay and slavish worship of a man with severe moral inconsistencies. This self righteous arrogance he and they display is right up there with a religious nut who is devoid of doubt and reason.
yada, yada, yada! I'm actually suggesting that in your criticism of Assange and his dubious morals you're completely missing the point and burying your head in the sand.
The point is we are being surveilled by our Governments and have been for over 10 years. It shouldn't take Julian Assange or any other character to tell you that, as in this instance Wiki-Leaks' testimonial isn't needed.
It's also blindingly obvious you're trying very hard to discredit the claim by discrediting the source ...WHY? the claim is sound and Wiki-Leaks isn't the even the original source of this claim. As I said in my previous post; computer encryption has been a source of concern for Governments since the 90's and it's natural that concern now extends to mobile computing.
Comments
<snip> I will doubt everything he says.
is it dark where your head is?
I also didn't say he was absolutely guilty (hence my use of the word "alleged" just that his response to the charges are very suspicious and there is reason to suspect the Swedes have more than the claims of the women.
I have seen his little herd of sheep post some very disgusting things and make a lot of assumptions based on hearsay and slavish worship of a man with severe moral inconsistencies. This self righteous arrogance he and they display is right up there with a religious nut who is devoid of doubt and reason.
Are you actually suggesting blind acceptance of what he says is better than having doubts and critically examining what he says? I didn't say he was incapable of saying something true, just that his past behavior does not inspire much confidence in his motives and the accuracy of what he claims.
I also didn't say he was absolutely guilty (hence my use of the word "alleged" just that his response to the charges are very suspicious and there is reason to suspect the Swedes have more than the claims of the women.
I have seen his little herd of sheep post some very disgusting things and make a lot of assumptions based on hearsay and slavish worship of a man with severe moral inconsistencies. This self righteous arrogance he and they display is right up there with a religious nut who is devoid of doubt and reason.
yada, yada, yada! I'm actually suggesting that in your criticism of Assange and his dubious morals you're completely missing the point and burying your head in the sand.
The point is we are being surveilled by our Governments and have been for over 10 years. It shouldn't take Julian Assange or any other character to tell you that, as in this instance Wiki-Leaks' testimonial isn't needed.
It's also blindingly obvious you're trying very hard to discredit the claim by discrediting the source ...WHY? the claim is sound and Wiki-Leaks isn't the even the original source of this claim. As I said in my previous post; computer encryption has been a source of concern for Governments since the 90's and it's natural that concern now extends to mobile computing.
All articles about Julian Assange should start off, "James Bond villain and Wikileaks founder?"
Lol