tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post7139006273554029717..comments2023-08-28T02:27:17.366-07:00Comments on Jaraparilla: Where's That WikiLeaks Party Inquiry?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger86125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-16598690246101415342014-01-30T04:40:30.445-08:002014-01-30T04:40:30.445-08:00Let me guess the names of those "multiple (in...Let me guess the names of those "multiple (insider or ex-insider?) sources...<br /><br />Sure, that's why you have to resort to "They are schizophrenic" when you are hopelessly confused by the fact of Wikileaks Party tweeting out links to scientific reports proving that climate change is a reality. I would have said that was ample rebuttal/answer to your belligerent Twitter campaign for answers/"plenty of opportunities to deny it".<br /><br />Do you not see how your obsessive focus on the "John Shipton as idiot/scourge of the earth/Hitler meme is distracting you from giving Julian Assange any real support? For example, there have been a couple of significant items about the Swedish farce come out recently that you missed entirely. Or, at least, you didn't bother to retweet them. Too busy, I guess...<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-24911650222112642122014-01-30T03:57:48.945-08:002014-01-30T03:57:48.945-08:00"Danish Doctor Offers Ten Myths About Psychot..."Danish Doctor Offers Ten Myths About Psychotropic Drugs" - why should I bother reading that shit? Fuck off. Jaraparillahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06336314539987735082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-43554883799625919612014-01-30T01:56:14.719-08:002014-01-30T01:56:14.719-08:00But I'm not suggesting you stop criticising Wi...But I'm not suggesting you stop criticising Wikileaks Party - that's your right. I'm suggesting you research your facts BEFORE you do so. "Supporting or opposing, what is the difference?" - that wasn't the point of my post. The point was that you MISTAKENLY leapt onto something - anything - you could find that you thought you could use to criticise WLP. And you got it wrong, thereby damaging your own reputation as a "truth-seeker". Don't you see that if you try TOO HARD to smear an organisation, and you repeatedly get your facts wrong, it's gonna rebound on you? You want to continue to be taken seriously as a social media commenter, right? My suggestion is meant to help you get back on track.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-28115317060535278392014-01-29T15:10:19.809-08:002014-01-29T15:10:19.809-08:00Shipton's climate denialism has been confirmed...Shipton's climate denialism has been confirmed to me by multiple sources who are in a position to know. That would be sufficient for any journo. I have given Shipton and WLP plenty of opportunities to deny it. They have not. <br /><br />Now you come out with the usual bullshit anonymous threats of defamation cases? Fuck off. Jaraparillahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06336314539987735082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-35724789529088505182014-01-29T15:07:08.452-08:002014-01-29T15:07:08.452-08:00Supporting or opposing, what is the difference? Wh...Supporting or opposing, what is the difference? What has this got to do with WikiLeaks? How does this help get Julian Assange out of the Ecuadorean Embassy? Why are you WLP defenders always anonymous? <br /><br />Pfft! Fuck off.Jaraparillahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06336314539987735082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-1949061787218737312014-01-28T23:29:10.880-08:002014-01-28T23:29:10.880-08:00Gary, you should stop, you really should.
@WikiL...Gary, you should stop, you really should. <br /><br />@WikiLeaksParty <br />Danish Doctor Offers Ten Myths About Psychotropic Drugs. By Pete Calautti http://wkl.kz/1f9edlt #WLParty #auspol<br /><br />@jaraparilla <br />Looks like @WikiLeaksParty is supporting psychotropic drug use now. I don't remember THAT being in the Constitution either... #EndWLparty<br /><br />You didn't even read the link in WLP's tweet, did you? If you had, you'd have seen that the article they are promoting is clearly AGAINST pyschotropic drugs.<br /><br />You're beginning to embarrass yourself with this blind hatred and chronic impulsiveness. You're gonna end up wrecking your own reputation if you don't stop this, mate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-35195799994553880272014-01-16T09:20:20.999-08:002014-01-16T09:20:20.999-08:00Sorry, one last thing. Here's a tweet of yours...Sorry, one last thing. Here's a tweet of yours from yesterday.<br /><br />So do Assange &@wikileaks disagree with @wikileaksparty & @johnshipton who think man-made global warming is a hoax? Can we clarify this now?<br />https://twitter.com/jaraparilla/status/423400099595558914<br /><br />Above in this blog you've said " I HAVE BEEN TOLD that WLP CEO John Shipton circulated emails claiming man-made global warming is a hoax" but here you are re-stating what you only know as having "been told" - essentially hearsay - as a FACT on twitter. Can you not see how wrong that is? Why are you surprised that people in Wikileaks Party think you might have to be slapped with a defamation lawsuit? That is exactly what you are doing - defaming someone by publicly stating hearsay as fact! You're a journalist, right? How on earth can you not understand how wrong it is to potentially libel someone based on hearsay evidence?<br /><br />Do you see now why I make statements like "I am so sorry that that was done to you [ie. your views got poisoned early on and are now 'locked in'] as you were such a great supporter of Wikileaks and now your effectiveness has been well and truly damaged."?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-76049808801577193772014-01-16T08:38:33.673-08:002014-01-16T08:38:33.673-08:00PS. I should add that I think it is correct that t...PS. I should add that I think it is correct that the Wikileaks Party people do NOT make public statements ahead of the results of an official enquiry. It would be deeply unprofessional. Where you see "hiding" and "dishonesty" I see "restraint" and "professionalism". Our difference of opinion on that I think are, to some extent at least, the result of your views having been formed early in this scandal by being much closer to, and believing, the huge amount of high-profile media smearing and selective leaking that went on right at the start. As I said, I think your opinions got "locked in" at that stage and you are now quite prejudiced against the Party. Nothing they say publicly now can change your mind; you will never forgive them a single wrong step, even if you later find out that you were originally misled and your views are based on false information. For example, you "were told" that John Shipton ciculated climate change-denying emails - I assume from that you don't know whether that allegation is true or not; nevertheless, it fits your now-set-in-stone views about some schism between Wikileaks Party and Greens Party, so you are happy to believe it regardless. Personally, I DO remember seeing some pretty below-the-belt tactics in print and in social media from the Greens against WLP - almost to be expected in an election - and can't see how the Wikileaks Party is in any way climate-denialist. They are tweeting about the TPP Environment chapter, I've read articles on their website that give a "climate change is definitely happening" slant. Perhaps they are simply posting BOTH sides of the climate change argument, or posting the odd "counter-factual" piece, without necessarily taking a side? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-83292578108684526122014-01-16T08:17:30.651-08:002014-01-16T08:17:30.651-08:00Hi Gary,
Thanks for that detailed response. It al...Hi Gary,<br /><br />Thanks for that detailed response. It all makes sense to me, even though I disagree with some of it.<br /><br />While I insist on my right to post anonymously, I can see that your views on the Wikileaks Party are so entrenched by now that it is somewhat automatic for you to assume that any view that opposes your own must somehow come from the Wikileaks Party themselves. However, I want to assure you that I have no connection whatsoever with WLP - none at all; I have never met nor spoken to a single WLP member. These are the views of an outsider, who happens to have some inside knowledge of what really went on. I too, like you, will be very very glad when it all comes out in the inquiry. I've had a LOT more patience than you have had about the delay in the facts being published (because I personally can't tell from the terms of reference of the inquiry just how much work is involved for the outside auditor, so I feel I can't judge whether the delay is appropriate or to be expected), but I sympathise with you that it does seem to be taking a very long time.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-14702997518954555522014-01-15T20:10:36.706-08:002014-01-15T20:10:36.706-08:00Disgruntled comments from a Greens-bashing rant fr...Disgruntled comments from a Greens-bashing rant from the Sex Party? Not exactly a substitute for a proper explanation is it?.Jaraparillahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06336314539987735082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-67747684237505234482014-01-15T19:08:20.164-08:002014-01-15T19:08:20.164-08:001. WACA did not admit that in the tweet, although ...1. WACA did not admit that in the tweet, although I can understand why you interpret it that way. Even if WACA thinks that, who is to know for sure without some proof including testimony from Cassie, Gail etc?<br /><br />2. Even if NSW was a human error, what about WA?<br /><br />3. If NSW was really just human error, why not admit that and publish some honest inquiry results for all the world to see? This is not just about ME, which is why I keep pushing it publicly. A political party running on a transparency and accountability party has to live up to those values or it is just a joke.<br /><br />4. Sean Bedlam's treatment did not influence my opinions, so don't pretend it did. I have never met him, and only got to know him slightly through WLP before all this shit went down. Of course I now consider him a friend, given how he has been treated, how he has responded, and how he continues working to inspire others.<br /><br />5. I have been told that WLP CEO John Shipton circulated emails claiming man-made global warming is a hoax and the WLP blog still post climate denialist nonsense. Many still associated with WLP are disgruntled ex-Greens and I have seen many of them publicly blaming the Greens for the WLP election result. Unless things change, there is no denying that WikiLeaks Party are "climate change deniers" and Greens-bashers. This is having a damaging effect on WikiLeaks reputation, as my RTs show. WikiLeaks needs to explain their stance on this.<br /><br />6. Why are you posting this anonymously? Why is it so fucking hard for ANYONE associated with WLP to be honest IN PUBLIC? What have you all got to hide? How do you expect me or anyone else to take you seriously when you whisper like children behind the toilet shed, constantly blaming others instead of manning up and giving a public account for your own actions?<br /><br />Now we have Greg Barns and Gail Malone threatening to sue people for defamation? Sorry, but this is way beyond a joke. It is time for WikiLeaks to admit that this experiment has failed. If Julian doesn't want to shut down the party he should at least change the name - how about the Denialist Libertarian Party?Jaraparillahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06336314539987735082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-64492212646744518852014-01-15T04:38:37.486-08:002014-01-15T04:38:37.486-08:00Whoops! Looks like akaWACA just admitted that they...Whoops! Looks like akaWACA just admitted that they knew all along that the "WLP preferences far-right parties" was a simple human error mistake:<br /><br />https://twitter.com/akaWACA/status/423231932546023425<br /><br />So, what was all that fuss and smearing akaWACA did all about, eh? It wouldn't have been, by any chance, a diversionary tactic to distract from their own coup attempt to take over the top spot of the Wikileaks Party, would it?<br /><br />Like I said right at the beginning, akaWACA didn't give a fucking shit about what they were doing to the lead candidate's chances of getting out of the Ecuador embassy, as long as they protected themselves from any fall-out from their own thwarted - and over-reaching - political ambitions. <br /><br />No wonder Assange has disowned the kind of "support" akaWACA offers now. When are they going to stop feeding off Wikileaks' reputation and take the word out of their bloody name, as requested?<br /><br />Sorry Gary, I know Sean Bedlam was a friend of yours so it's understandable which way your initial sympathies and belief would go, but honestly mate, you got conned. It's no surprise that you are now completely confused when what you've come to believe is the "climate change deniers, Greens-bashing" WikiLeaks Party tweets the Environment Chapter of the TPP - you got fed so much bullshit right at the start that your beliefs about the Wikileaks Party are now fundamentally "locked in" and it's impossible for you to see them with an open mind. I am so sorry that that was done to you, as you were such a great supporter of Wikileaks and now your effectiveness has been well and truly damaged.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-88523004335598548132014-01-03T22:52:31.866-08:002014-01-03T22:52:31.866-08:00there is no accusation(s), no more than yours;and ...there is no accusation(s), no more than yours;and by the way, you're anonymous to me as I haven't met you; stop blaming by the way, it is no excuses or answers to what answers you are looking for.. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-39264897569786131392014-01-03T22:50:01.060-08:002014-01-03T22:50:01.060-08:00I also thought that the phone calls and the opport...I also thought that the phone calls and the opportuniies to talk to John weren't genuine, or else?? someone had already made up their mind, that's what I read all along.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-57707963676256975692014-01-03T22:45:50.831-08:002014-01-03T22:45:50.831-08:00People like this are used by agencies to pervert t...People like this are used by agencies to pervert the truth; all of a sudden Julian has Aspergers, but not during all that time prior to this?? is your diagnostic reliable? a bit of poison here and there, and all the mass ferments, that's what I see happening.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-35225473927489887192014-01-03T22:39:45.806-08:002014-01-03T22:39:45.806-08:00exactly, which one is yours? are you asking for an...exactly, which one is yours? are you asking for answers when you are yet assuming?? stop assuming and the answers will come, if you're worthy of receiving them at least..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-22498149424649053972014-01-03T22:32:54.095-08:002014-01-03T22:32:54.095-08:00agree to that statement.. people crying not becaus...agree to that statement.. people crying not because of their disapointment, but those who had taking things in their hands and in haste moved on without waiting for an explanation of their most trusted leader, who in haste stabbed him in the back whilst his life is in danger and has represented all of us in exposing the truth.... who wants anyone who doesn't stand their ground until all makes sense. The reasons of their distresses came by the fact that they wouldn't be able to return; one causes one to fall in his greatest distress and then suffers great remorse.. that is a sad fact, after so much that was given by them, what a story, who would trust them in the future, not even the liberals for the time being.. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-77040275563234428852014-01-03T22:25:48.259-08:002014-01-03T22:25:48.259-08:00no, we will see something even greater with the WA...no, we will see something even greater with the WA re-voting!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-67669639595511470192013-11-22T10:28:13.491-08:002013-11-22T10:28:13.491-08:00There's always so many people who really don&#...There's always so many people who really don't know what they're doing who jump on the bandwagon of someone more famous, in order to get their own 15 minutes.<br />From what I can gather, Wikileaks "Australia" was set up by a couple of women who simply registered a website. They then courted Assange's mother, and now they 'cry' about the party - Samantha Castro and Kaz Cochrane- what kind of 'ownership' do they have of Julian Assange and what he does or doesn't do? Honestly- I'm not saying the guy is perfect, but endless, amateur volunteers that want to use any platform to promote their own 'integrity' - when they have no political, or other kind of expertise. This is where these things always fall down, because they attract idealistic freaks, who can't wait, can't contain themselves, and cannot help but use the press for attention. <br />Whatever did or did not happen, these people show their rank amateurism in politics by their sheer inability to go through a thorough process, before 'crying' etc... This tells me they are simply using the party for some kind of personal emotional need. Every political party has to offer its preferences to the other parties that are most likely to help them get elected. I'm not saying this should have been done in secret, but these 'crying' women, are damaging things beyond belief, because they cannot keep their own need to be seen as full of integrity and honesty, from damaging the party and the natural political process. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-64236991136229038072013-10-17T12:42:47.054-07:002013-10-17T12:42:47.054-07:00Halle-bloody-lujah. FINALLY the truth is getting o...Halle-bloody-lujah. FINALLY the truth is getting out. It's great that it's a candidate from the Sex Party saying this about what happened with the Wikileaks Party preferences and their attempts to join the Minor Party Alliance:<br /><br />"Wikileaks were players who made a couple of genuine administrative errors in their final preferences."<br /><br />and<br /><br />"At one stage, a young and inexperienced staffer who had mistakenly allocated a high preference vote to Australia First thinking it was Australian Voice, was so bombarded with hate mail by Greens supporters, that she went into hiding." < not sure if that's referring to Cass Findlay or Gail Malone.<br />https://newmatilda.com/2013/10/18/greens-vs-micro-party-alliance<br /><br />So, I was almost right. I guessed the mistake was mixing up the Family First and Australia First parties; in fact, it was Australian Voice and Australia First. Still, close - and I'd like that cigar please anyway.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-24133344639714608352013-10-13T02:05:00.165-07:002013-10-13T02:05:00.165-07:00WACA
@akaWACA
@KealohaDudoit @wikileaks This is K...WACA<br />@akaWACA <br />@KealohaDudoit @wikileaks This is Kaz. WACA have been discussing name change for 10wks.our resources are our own.this change will come soon.<br />https://twitter.com/akaWACA/status/389231076113010688<br /><br />10 weeks, eh? That would make it the first week in August that akaWACA were thinking of changing their name. If anyone cannot see by now that the whole National Council debacle and rage quit wasn't really about a mistake in the preferences ordering on the ballot paper, then they are blind. Sam Castro made a powergrab in the NC and tried to hijack the Wikileaks Party to her own political project. When it failed she rage-quit, taking her accolates (and Dan Mathews - I don't include him. I kind of assume he didn't have the full picture on what was really going on) with her, then immediately started a high-profile campaign (leaks to media, smears of her "opponents", lying to the supporter base on twitter) to destroy the WLP. Clear as day that's what happened, to me. Seems to be what WL are saying too:<br /><br />@wikileaks <br />@akaWACA @KealohaDudoit Ten weeks well preceeds our request and reflects that akaWACA is a power vehicle and does not put WikiLeaks first.<br />https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/389237291295580160<br /><br />@wikileaks <br />@AnonOpsAU Of course not. Almost all are good people. Sam Castro operates WACA for her own ambitions. Others are recruited in our name.<br />https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/389213504881704961<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-16849497616988804032013-09-30T21:10:31.334-07:002013-09-30T21:10:31.334-07:00David Haidon wrote: Meeting Monday 19th of August....<b><a href="http://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/David-Haidon-WLP-Statement.pdf" rel="nofollow">David Haidon wrote</a>:</b> Meeting Monday 19th of August. We start at 11:30 amish when everyone gets there. After much yelling and tears we decide on the idea of an independent review. It is agreed that it is the only way to get this all sorted out with any integrity intact. Myself, Sam, Kaz, and the others in the office leave Greg Barns and go to discuss details of the review to present to the NC. There is resistance from some on NC. <br /><br />Tuesday morning: Review has more traction now. NC have basically agreed it shall happen. Just working on the details. I'm fielding phone calls from volunteers wanting to know what is going on. We have a volunteer meeting that night, 50 odd people are there. Spend most of the time discussing what has happened. People are pretty upset, but say that we should have the review as soon as possible.<br /><br />Wednesday morning: John Shipton tries to call me, but I'm in the city loop and can't take his call. I get to the office and see Sam, Kaz and Leslie Cannold are at a cafe across the road. Daniel Mathews joins us. Review looks in jeopardy again. Then it's not. Then we are waiting for Julian to have a say on the statement. It goes out. Ok again we can get back to work. Leslie is having continued doubts about what is happening. I leave a message with John Shipton that he can call me back any time. <br /><br />John calls Sean Bedlam, social media captain, and says that he is taking direct control of the campaign and is circumventing the National Council. He then calls me back and says the same thing to me, "You and Sean have to make myself and Gregory the point of reference and bypass the National Council because they are a bunch of raving fucking lunatics"! Huh? Is he saying that we now need to circumvent the democratic processes of the party?<br /><br />Resignation statements start being written! The small office we are in starts to smell of sweat and tears. Pete Green, National Volunteer Coordinator, say he has to leave, he doesn't want to be a part of this. He was originally hired by Greg, so we are not sure if he will go straight to him and tell him what is happening. Pete insists that he won't, I believe him, but it is making everyone very nervous. <br /><br />People are insisting we give the NC one last chance to fix this. Sam and Kaz email everyone. No answer. Greg calls Leslie to scold her for sending out a tweet he didn't like earlier this day. They start calling other council members, discussions are held. Time to call London. They message Julian's assistant, it's 7am there, he should be able to answer. <b><a href="http://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/David-Haidon-WLP-Statement.pdf" rel="nofollow">Nothing</a>!</b><br /><br />John Shipton calls Kaz and threatens her with legal action if she opposes him running the internal review. Has he gone mad? Leslie says she can't wait. She posts her statement ... http://cannold.com/articles/article/leslie-resignation-statement-of-fact-on-candidacy-re-the-wikileaks-partyLeo Braunnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-53791614778442663952013-09-30T20:57:39.301-07:002013-09-30T20:57:39.301-07:00Andrew Crook wrote: Although Julian Assange has cl...<b><a href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/08/30/revealed-assange-knee-deep-in-failed-wikileaks-preference-deals" rel="nofollow">Andrew Crook wrote</a>:</b> Although Julian Assange has claimed the WikiLeaks preference deal was an "administrative error", leaked emails reveal Assange was behind the controversial deal. A damning internal email trail from inside the WikiLeaks Party has revealed that Julian Assange was intimately involved in the Senate preference debacle that led to the party's implosion. <br /><br />Leaked emails sent by Assange (<a href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/08/30/revealed-assange-knee-deep-in-failed-wikileaks-preference-deals" rel="nofollow">obtained by Crikey</a>) lay bare the internal war that consumed the transparency advocates and show how the self-described "president" and "party leader" tried to railroad democratic processes and impose the will of a small clique of acolytes. <br /><br />Under the subject line "NC (national council) micromanagement of preferences", Assange, the lead Victorian Senate candidate, slammed the council and suggested it should become a rubber stamp for decisions taken by individual candidates!Leo Braunnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-20615595920207814652013-09-29T22:57:59.320-07:002013-09-29T22:57:59.320-07:00"I believe in facts about conspiracies"!...<b>"I believe in facts about conspiracies"!</b> "Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It's important not to confuse these two. Generally, when there's enough facts about a conspiracy we simply call this news".<br /><br /><b>What about 9/11?</b> "I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud". <b>What about the Bilderberg conference?</b> "That is vaguely conspiratorial, in a networking sense. <a href="http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/features/wanted-by-the-cia-julian-assange-wikileaks-founder-28548843.html" rel="nofollow">We have published their meeting notes</a>".<br /><br />Since when did WikiLeaks become the <a href="http://www.infowars.com/wikileaks-end-your-war-on-911-truth" rel="nofollow">tip of the spear</a> in the global war for truth, transparency, knowledge, and freedom? An organization that rejects the truth that 9/11 was <a href="http://thedailybell.com/1750/Frauds-of-WikiLeaks" rel="nofollow">an inside job</a> is not working to promote transparency, free speech, and truth, but more nefarious causes. <br /><br />Those who seek to marginalize the global 9/11 <a href="http://911blogger.com/news/2010-07-22/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-annoyed-911-truth" rel="nofollow">truth and justice movement</a> are not on the right side of history. The official 9/11 fable does not rest on solid foundations, but on totalitarian propaganda and trauma-based collective brainwashing. By endorsing the 9/11 fable, WikiLeaks proved itself to be a compromised organization that has no interest in revealing <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/22/911-narrative-remains-broad-and-repetitious" rel="nofollow">secret truths</a> to the masses of the world.Leo Braunnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7079940018550776884.post-62401921557371076002013-09-29T22:37:35.272-07:002013-09-29T22:37:35.272-07:00• Likewise intimidated Liz, beset by the wolves ga...• Likewise intimidated Liz, beset by the wolves gang (shadowing WLP <a href="http://forum.wikileaksparty.org.au/index.php?topic=93.0" rel="nofollow">debate forum</a>) nowhere to be found. Since the shared opinion by the health freedoms proponent:<br /><br />"I am massively concerned about GM foods, fluoridated water, and a one-size-fits all approach to vaccines. I believe that science is not static, it should always be questioned and that we the people need to take more control over our own health. I also believe there is a heavy bias in mainstream media in favour of the agenda of those with vested interests. I hope that Wikileaks will work to preserve our right to determine what we put into our own bodies and make sure that we are always have a voice -- <a href="http://forum.wikileaksparty.org.au/index.php?topic=93.0" rel="nofollow">even on controversial issues</a> -- that some groups would rather we don't talk about".Leo Braunnoreply@blogger.com