Reasons not to take the Julian Assange story at face value

By Adam Ormes

News from Nowhere

Witnessing the uniformity of the popular response to Assange’s removal from the Ecuadorian embassy demonstrates that precious few commentators are willing to discuss the numerous ‘red flags’ in his story. It would seem therefore that it is this reluctant sleuth’s duty to lay them out.

There are perhaps 5 main points to consider here:

1. Assange’s connection to ‘The Family’ child LSD brainwashing cult – which was very likely an intelligence operation. Substantiating evidence for this claim is provided below.
   
   
2. Assange’s hacker alias, which he used from the age of 16, was Mendax – meaning ‘liar’ in Latin. He was caught after a police raid in 1991, and charged in 1994 “with thirty-one counts of hacking and related crimes. In December 1996, he pleaded guilty to twenty-five charges (the other six were dropped), and was ordered to pay reparations of A$2,100 and released on a good behaviour bond. The perceived absence of malicious or mercenary intent and his disrupted childhood were cited to justify his lenient penalty.” [link]
   
   
3. Assange’s relationships with US government. “On the 17th of November 1994, Julian Assange replied to an email from NASA employee Fred Blonder(,) the UNIX toolkit coordinator at NASIRC (NASA Automated Systems Incident Response Capability). (…) Someone from Los Alamos National Laboratories (mcn) was copied on the email (identity unknown). Also copied on the email was Quentin Fennessy from Sematech. SEMATECH was formed in 1987 as a partnership between the United States Government and 14 U.S.-based semiconductor manufacturers.” Likewise, his former hacking comrade Pieter Zaitko, who went on to work for BBN Technologies, a DARPA military contractor, claimed that Assange’s “graduate work had been funded by a US Government grant, specifically NSA and DARPA money which was supposed to be used for ‘fundamental security research’.” This was subsequently revoked; however it begs the question as to how and why such funding was obtained in the first place. [link]
   
   
4. John Young, an early Wikileaks collaborator and founder of Cryptome, a similar site (whose own affiliations likewise merit investigation), came out in 2010 claiming that ‘Wikileaks has always been a commercial enterprise hiding behind a narcissistic “public interest” PR.’ “Speaking to US talk radio, Young compared Julian Assange to Henry Kissinger, and other “spook insiders” who have turned their insider knowledge into a lucrative sideline.” [link] It has also been alleged that Wikileaks trades under the name of Sunshine Press Productions EHF, a for-profit limited company registered in Iceland in which Assange is 94% shareholder, while claiming to be a non-profit. [link]
   
   
5. Assange refuses to discuss 9/11, in a similar manner to his supporter Noam Chomsky, stating in an interview “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.” It has likewise been noted that the Israeli government was rather pleased about the content of the Wikileaks releases. [link]

READ MORE