RT: Anonymous and WikiLeaks: Is it really a breakup?

Published: 16 October, 2012, 22:12
Edited: 17 October, 2012, 12:44

Image from wikileaks.org

Image from wikileaks.org

Whistleblowing website WikiLeaks has come under fire from members of hacktivist group Anonymous, who lashed out against a paywall banner on its main page. But since the group is not a single entity and has no leader, who has the power to speak up?

Anonymous has been a longtime advocate of WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange, vocally supporting the website’s mission of sharing secret data, news leaks, and classified information with the public.

However, information recently posted by Anonymous on AnonPaste.me says WikiLeaks “has chosen to dishonor and insult Anonymous and all information activists” by requiring payment to view documents it previously made available for free.

But Anonymous is not a structured group with a defined leader – and the identity of the people behind this post and various Twitter usernames remains unclear. The uncertainty has left many wondering whether these opinions represent the group as a whole, or just a few scattered members.

Previous partnership

The annoyance that Anonymous members seem to be experiencing is likely due to the fact that they take credit for some of WikiLeaks’ major data publications.

Anonymous and other hacktivists say they were the parties which provided WikiLeaks with the more than 2 million emails released as part of the Syria files.

The publication was not the first time that Anonymous and WikiLeaks have worked together. Last December, Anonymoushacked five million emails from Texas-based private security firm Stratfor. The group later relayed those emails to WikiLeaks, which published them in February.

Provoked by a paywall

The statements came after WikiLeaks posted a red overlay banner on the site, asking visitors to donate money. The banner cannot be closed and unless a donation is made, certain information – including GIFiles and the Syria emails – are not displayed.

.
.
.
.
.
.

The donation advertisement can be circumvented by disabling Javascript, but Anonymous argues that average visitors will not know how to do that.

WikiLeaks said the banner is a US election related campaign which will expire on Election Day. The ad, which is narrated by Assange and ends with him asking for donations, encourages visitors to “vote with their wallet” this election season.

Small text at the bottom of the WikiLeaks page, however, says the banner only appears once a day for each user.

The site admits the paywall’s presence is less than ideal, but says it is financially necessary.

“WikiLeaks faces unprecedented costs due to involvement in over 12 concurrent legal matters around the world, including our litigation of the US military in the Bradley Manning case. Our FBI file as of the start of the year had grown to 42,135 pages,” a written response from the website said.

But at least some Anonymous members see the paywall as nothing more than a fundraising tool for Julian Assange, leading members to speak out.

A statement on pastebin.com said that Anonymous cannot support the “One Man Julian Assange show,” adding that while the group continues to support the original idea behind WikiLeaks, the website doesn’t seem to stand for that idea anymore.

.
.

The members seem to continue to oppose Assange’s extradition to the US, deeming him a “content provider and publisher, not a criminal.” However, the hacktivists said on pastebin.com that WikiLeaks should not be about Assange alone, and they feel the page has become an advocacy site for the whistleblower:

“We have been worried about the direction WikiLeaks is going for a while. In the recent month the focus moved away from actual leaks and the fight for freedom of information further and further while it concentrated more and more on Julian Assange.” 

Anonymous accountability

The question remains who exactly is behind these statements, and whether the opinions represent Anonymous as a whole.

Since the beginning, Anonymous has made clear that the group is not a single entity led by any individual, and has no central command.

“Anonymous is a very complex and versatile entity and there will never be any leader that will speak for them all. We would not want it that way. Of course, there are some channels (like the big Twitter accounts) that have more reach than others and thus it can be argued that they have more influence. But that doesn’t make us leaders,” the pastebin.com statement said.

.
.
.
.
.
.
This entry was posted in Financial/economic information, Illuminati/Terrorism/Corruption, Political and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to RT: Anonymous and WikiLeaks: Is it really a breakup?

  1. Debbie says:

    Now that we know ASSANGE is a Khazar Zionist agent for Netanyahu….it’s good to know Anonymous has taken a stand…here is an article that is even more interesting about israel our “ally” wokring for teh demise of America:

    http://vaticproject.blogspot.com/2012/10/pentagon-us-weapons-full-of-fake.html

    • Nicki Tompkins says:

      I’m curious, Debbie, where did you get that info? I didn’t see anything on the link you listed to support that Assange is a Khazar…

      • Debbie says:

        Nicki…it was information circulating on the web a few weeks ago…look at Veterans Today -Gordon Duff’s website…it’s probably there…if I can find it I’ll come back and post it here for you…or, it might be an old Vatic post….

      • Debbie says:

        Nicki…here you go

        http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/30/press-tv-exclusive-assange-mossad-ties-unveiled/

        and if you go to the veterans today site and do a search of ASSANGE ISRAEL…there are more articles there, too.

      • Realmz Lord says:

        I’ve also seen it stated that Assange has associations to the Rothschilds… Not sure if its correct but Wikileaks definitely hasen’t lived up to what many Anons envisioned. I know that for sure!!

        For me personally it was when they announced VAST UFO files that they were going to release and then turned out to be very minor and associated to some UFO cult that was being monitored? :/

        If wikileaks wasn’t a purposefully set up organisation to control the flow and adjust opinion strategically of the masses. When they announced the release of UFO content many elite factions and bloodline run institutions would have pounced on them and by now its 100% co-opted.

        Another lame Rothschild etc front.

        On a side not there is speculation that Anonymous was co-opted itself very early on in its inception by various arms of the US government. Many Anons have entertained this notion to an extent. And for me personally I feel it doesnt really matter anymore. The concept of Resistance managed to flurish anyway so if it was co-opted. May I say Epic Fail to whichever thinktank thought up that retarded BS.

        Although keep an eye out for false flags blamed on Anonymous. (Sony Hacks, etc) cough cough. They might break the DNS Network and blame Anonymous.

        Fact remains they awoke many people to resistance, critical thinking and opened our eyes in many ways. I for one as well as many others was quite shocked to find out (Basically the Illuminati conspiracy is true) although Its mind bogglingly more complicated than that and disinformation is around every corner. We are awake and becoming aware.

        Tick Tock……

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s