Hoocoodanode?

Everyone fell over themselves trying to defend Assange as a journalist: WHAT F’ING JOURNALIST TRADEMARKS THEIR NAMES?!?!?

Is there a reason he’s stopped releasing the goods? I seem to have missed something between the point where he had serious information to share with the world, and this bizarre quasi-celebrity exercise in narcissistic masturbation.

Contrary to popular entertainment, the bad guys are not always preceded by threatening minor chords whenever they appear, nor do the good guys necessary get trumpet fanfares announcing their arrival.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/98889321@N00/5479318599/

JA can go sh*t in a tricornered hat for all I care; the undeniable impact of the leaks are what reverberate through the world right now. I appreciate the fact that he helped make the leaks public and keep them visible when many sought to disappear the leaker and put the genie back in the bottle.

You can see the application here.

And in respect of your other questions, look at who is listed as the proprietor.

Perhaps someone else owns JulianAssange.com?

Now thats bizarre.

For an egotist, it’s much simpler: “If people get killed, obviously they were bad people, if they weren’t bad people it’s someone else’s fault, and who cares anyway as long as I get on CNN?”

Presumably he’s not the only person with that name…

Private Eye Magazine Lied To Assange.

“Hypocrisy is the Great English Vice”

‘Private Eye’ is a magazine which expresses a particularly strong moral dislike of misogyny, anti-feminism, holocaust denial and anti-Semitism – in public that is. Behind the scenes at ‘Private Eye’, things are rather different.

‘Private Eye’ appeared to be so obviously concerned that Julian Assange might have caused harm to women and Jewish people, I took them at their word and wrote to Ian Hislop. My letter warned of something far more dangerous and sinister than Assange’s alleged crimes.

For decades, an individual has been churning out hate material and spreading it all over the internet. Not on hidden ‘Darknet’ sites and not even anonymously. It is all published under his own name and is easily obtainable from any of his numerous hate sites. Here are a few samples.

“It is no coincidence that those at the forefront of the campaign for so-called ‘feminism’ are Marxists and Jews. Indeed, the whole ‘women’s liberation movement’ was the creation of Jews…”

“ This was the hoax of the Jewish ‘holocaust’.”

“There are several excellent reasons why the story of “the Jewish holocaust” is a fictional tale – a product of Zionist propaganda – and why the so-called “evidence” which is produced, and which has been produced, in support of this story is suspect or false.”

Strangely, ‘Private Eye’s abhorrence of anti-Semitism and its pious concern for the defence of feminists, evaporated completely as soon someone other than Assange was being accused. ‘Private Eye’ didn’t want to run the story and no, they wouldn’t even publish a letter on the subject.

So it seems Holocaust denial and misogyny are not the real issues for ‘Private Eye’. It is Julian Assange himself that they disapprove of.

But why Assange and not the author of the hate material ? Read a little further and you will begin to see that ‘Private Eye’ is a bit more pro-establishment than it would have us believe.

The purveyor of the hate material is a police informer, with alleged links to MI5. The authorities’ failure to arrest this man, even though he has published illegal hate material for thirty years, certainly supports this assertion.

My letter to ‘Private Eye’ explained that the hate sites are used as ‘honey traps’ to attract extremists for the purpose of ID theft. The information is then passed on to the authorities. The problem with this strategy is that, although some extremists are prompted to attempt acts of terrorism by the material, they are not always caught in time. This is what happened in London in 1999. A young man, heavily influenced by the informer’s hate material, set off a series of nail bombs before he was caught by the police. An unborn child and its mother and many others, were killed in these attacks. At the time the security services said that the police informer was not under surveillance, so they could not have prevented the loss of life. Now more than a decade later, the informer is still publishing his dangerous nonsense and nothing is done. So it looks as if the bomb victim’s families were lied to in 1999, because this person is an informer and they knew exactly what he was up to.

But ‘Private Eye’, the magazine which promotes itself as a fearless exposer of the truth, wont touch this story. They wont even allow any mention of the informer in their letters page. Yet Julian Assange is pilloried in every issue of the ‘Eye’, over allegations which at present haven’t even been tested in court.

Could it be that for ‘Private Eye’, Holocaust denial and manslaughter is O.K. If MI5 says it is?

Some very lucrative careers in the mainstream media have been launched on the back of ‘anti-establishment’ satirical magazine ‘Private Eye’. Next time you see a rich little guy on TV ‘defending to the death’ our right to free speech, just remember it doesn’t extend to the unborn child who was blown up before it had a chance to live.

I’m sure we’ll have many more threads in which we discuss Julian Assangeâ„¢, and I’ll be more than happy to extend to Julian Assangeâ„¢ the same courtesy I show Sarah Palinâ„¢ by always, always, always including the trademark symbol when I type his name.

On an unrelated topic, remember when Assangeâ„¢ threatened to sue the papers he was leaking to when they released things on a different schedule than he wanted, on the grounds that stolen Pentagon memos were his personal intellectual property? Yeah, good times.

the leaked police reports are oh-so-very believable and completely in line with this guy’s very, VERY well-documented egotism.

You should listen to yourself. Guilty until proven innocent, eh? And trademarking his name is just all the more concrete “evidence” we need to prove that Assange is noting more than a rapist, right?

Never mind war crimes, murder and corruption in your name… you’re too busy having a conniption fit over Assange.

A) You’re convinced he’s a rapist because apparently you were there in the bed with him and know what happened.

B) You think he’s a terrorist because he helped expose war crimes, murder and corruption in your name.

C) You’re jealous of the man because you’re an insignificant twat.

That said, I think this is a bad move on his part, but it hardly deserves all this teeth gnashing and shrill diatribes against him. Hey, if he’s found guilty of rape, etc beyond a reasonable doubt, I’ll be very disturbed with the man too. But, I wasn’t there and he’s not been found guilty of ANYTHING.

If his name is trademarked, and an organization fakes a document purported to be written by him, it certainly makes it easier to take legal action against the culprit.

That, or, y’know, crazy pills.