Author Topic: AnonymousIRC statement regarding WikiLeaks  (Read 7244 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


  • Guest
Re: AnonymousIRC statement regarding WikiLeaks
« Reply #15 on: October 18, 2012, 07:43:44 AM »
This is how Julian Assange has replied to the Anonymous posts:


via @wikileaks

Mon Oct 15 04:19:15 UTC 2012

Basic solidarity in WikiLeaks & Anonymous.

By Julian Assange

Freedom isn't free, justice isn't free and solidarity isn't
free. They all require generosity, self-discipline, courage and a sense of perspective.

Groups with unity flourish and those without unity are
destroyed and replaced by those who have it.

Traditional armies gain unity through isolation, ritualized
obedience, and through coercive measures applied to
dissenters up to and including death.

Groups who do not have techniques of unity derived from
solidarity and common cause will be dominated by groups with coercive unity.

In the end it is the techniques of unity that dominate our
civilization. Unified groups grow and multiply. Groups which lack unity imperil themselves and their allies.

It doesn't matter what principles a group espouses. If it
is not able to demonstrate basic unity it will be dominated
by alliances that do.

When a group grows large the public press becomes a medium through which the group talks to itself. This gives the public press influence over the groups self-awareness. The public press has its agendas. So do insiders who speak to it.

For large groups, group insiders who interface with the public press are able to lever themselves into a position of
internal influence via press influence.

Because Anonymous is anonymous, those who obtain this or other forms of leadership influence can be secretly decapitated and replaced by other interests.

This is exactly what happened in the Sabu affair. An
important part of Anonymous ended up being controlled by the FBI. The cooption of its most visible figure, Sabu, was then used to entrap others.

FBI agents or informers have subsequently run entrapment
operations against WikiLeaks presenting as figures from

According to FBI indictments the FBI has at various times
controlled Anonymous servers. We must assume that currently
a substantial number of Anonymous severs and "leadership"
figures are compromised. This doesn't mean Anonymous
should be paralyzed by paranoia. But it must recognize the
reality of infiltration. The promotion of ""
and similar assets which are indistinguishable from an
entrapment operations must not be tolerated.

The strength of Anonymous was not having leadership or
other targetable assets. When each person has little
influence over the whole, and no assets have special
significance, compromise operations are expensive
and ineffective. The cryptography used in Friends of
WikiLeaks is based on this principle while WikiLeaks as
an organization has a well tested public leadership cohort
inorder to prevent covert leadership replacement.

Assets create patronage and conflict around asset
control. This includes virtual assets such as servers,
Twitter accounts and IRC channels.

The question Anonymous must ask is does it want to be
a mere gang ("expect us") or a movement of solidarity. A
movement of solidaarity obtains its unity through common value and through the symbolic celebration of individuals whose actions strive towards common virtues.

Assessing the statement by "@AnonymousIRC".

In relation to alleged associates of WikiLeaks. It is
rarely in an alleged associates interest, especially
early in a case, for us to be seen to be helping them
or endorsing them. Such actions can be used as evidence
against them. It raises the prestige stakes for prosecutors
who are likely to use these alleged associates in a public
proxy war against WikiLeaks. We do not publicly campaign
for alleged associates until we know their legal team
approves and our private actions must remain private. This calculous should be obvious.

Several weeks ago, WikiLeaks began a US election related
donations campaign which expires on election day, Nov 6.

The WikiLeaks campaign pop-up, which, was activated weeks
ago, requires tweeting, sharing, waiting or donating once
per day.

Torrents, unaffected even by this pop-up remain available
from the front page.

These details should have been clearer but were available
to anyone who cared to read. The exact logic and number of
seconds are in the page source. We are time and resource
constrained. We have many battles to deal with. Other than
adding a line of clarification, we have not changed the
campaign and nor do we intend to.

We know it is annoying. It is meant to be annoying. It is
there to remind you that the prospective destruction of
WikiLeaks by an unlawful financial blockade and an array
of military, intelligence, DoJ and FBI investigations,
and associated court cases is a serious business.

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.

US officials stated to Australian diplomats the the
investigation into WikiLeaks is of "unprecedented scale
and nature". Our people are routinely detained. Our editor
was imprisoned, placed under house arrest for 18 months,
and is now encircled in an embassy in London where he has
been formally granted political asylum. Our people and
associates are routinely pressured by the FBI to become
informers against our leadership.

Since late 2010 we have been under an unlawful financial
blockade. The blockade was found to be unlawful in the
Icelandic courts, but the credit companies have appealed
to the Supreme Court. Actions in other jurisdictions are
in progress, including a European Commission investigation
which has been going for over a year.

Despite this we have won every publishing battle and
prevailed over every threat. Last month the Pentagon
reissued its demands for us to cease publication of
military materials and to cease "soliciting" US military
sources. We will prevail there also, not because we are
adept, although we are, but because to do so is a virtue
that creates common cause.


Julian Assange
Embassy of Ecuador


  • Guest
Re: AnonymousIRC statement regarding WikiLeaks
« Reply #16 on: October 18, 2012, 07:53:23 AM »
... And this is the following reply posted by Anonymous:


Anonymous Statement On Wikileaks (October 15 - 2012 )

We would have preferred to have let this topic rest as we think it is distracting from more important issues. However, some allegations in Julian's statement [1] should be addressed to avoid certain misunderstandings. First off, thank you for making this statement, Julian. At least we are communicating again. Secondly, please note that this response was written collaboratively; this is not one voice but many.
Moving on to your statement:
> "Because Anonymous is anonymous, those who obtain this or other forms of
> leadership influence can be secretly decapitated and replaced by other
> interests."
We're a bit amazed how you, of all people, talk about leadership in Anonymous. We would have thought you understood us a little better. You seem to refer to Sabu, but you should realize he was never a leader of Anonymous. While he did have some influence over a handful of people who chose to work with him, he wasn't even a leader among this small and secluded group. Among those, he was one of the most vocal and thus it comes as no surprise that the media and public mistook him as a "leader" - the world is always easier to understand if you put labels on things.
We shouldn't forget though, that even during the LulzSec era there were quite a number of Anons who neither liked nor trusted Sabu, let alone accepted him as any kind of leader.
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. It does however leave us with a certain amount of responsibility, which is why we take the time to write this down. But in the end we always urged everyone to make up their own mind, to validate facts and not jump to conclusions based on assumptions.
Which brings us to the following statement:
> "According to FBI indictments the FBI has at various times
>  controlled Anonymous servers. We must assume that currently
>  a substantial number of Anonymous severs and "leadership"
>  figures are compromised."
Checking the facts, we find exactly one case where the FBI actually controlled "Anonymous' servers". This is referenced in Jeremy Hammond's complaint file, page 13, bullet point j: "...[Sabu], at the direction of the FBI, provided to HAMMOND and his co-conspirators a computer server in New York, New York, which could be used to store the data [...]."**[2]. This incident is well documented and occurred in an ongoing investigation where one of the key figures was actively working for the FBI.
We know of no other situation in which anything even remotely similar has happened. If you have evidence to show otherwise please do so,  as we would be most interested. Either way, there is nothing that allows the conclusion "a substantial number of Anonymous severs and leadership figures are compromised"; this is merely an assumption with no facts to back it.
> This doesn't mean Anonymous should be paralyzed by paranoia.
> But it must recognize the reality of infiltration. The promotion
> of "" and similar assets which are indistinguishable
> from an entrapment operations must not be tolerated.
It's quite ironic how you mention paranoia when it is you who is accusing, more or less, random people of working with law enforcement and "promoting insecure servers".
But thank you for finally letting us know what server you were referring to this whole time. It does surprise us, however, as was never considered for leaked materials or any other kind of sensitive information. It was a fun site which contained an image board and some platforms on which to share pictures and videos. It hardly matters as the site only existed for a few weeks and was never even finished, before the person running it decided to discontinue it.
@AnonymousIRC distributes a lot of links from the Anonymous community, and that is quite different from promoting "assets for entrapment operations"; this is a ridiculous notion and it makes us wonder who is becoming paralyzed by paranoia.
Finally, some words about solidarity and support. Those who have read our initial statement carefully will have seen that we are, by no means, calling for actions against Wikileaks or Julian Assange, nor do we condone such actions. We do, however, feel that Wikileaks has strayed from its original mission. While it is not our intention to throw dirt at each other we should state our reservations against Wikileaks clearly, because these are not based on assumptions but on past experiences and facts.
We should not need to remind you how closely we have cooperated with each other on occasion; nor do we need to explain what kind of personal risk many of our people took upon themselves while enabling you to make those last leaks available. But maybe we should for those who are not aware of the full history.
Two years ago Anonymous declared solidarity with you, bringing to attention that a financial boycott of Wikileaks is unrightful and unacceptable. Websites have been brought down - not really to sabotage their business but simply to bring attention to the fact of the boycott. Anons are facing criminal charges and upto 20 years in jail for that.
One year ago, in the shadow of the "Sabu incident", Stratfor was compromised, revealing their entire email spool that ultimatively ended up on Wikileaks. Where it was released as a trickle of information, much the same as it was with the diplomatic cables before the whole stash got oopsed.
In all cases, Wikleaks was handed the leaks they published because the sources trusted them to be the best possible option. But we do not think that is true anymore. To be honest, we had better reasons to cut ties with you before, especially when you blindsided us with the aforementioned statements regarding Anonymous servers and leadership being compromised, and the implication that we would promote assets to entrap fellow Anons. But we always held back because we believed in the mission.
We understand that Wikileaks is run on donations but we fail to understand where it is spending the amounts of money it receives. We fail to see how Wikileaks needs hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to operate, when we obeserve other platforms that can provide the same service for a fraction of that. Again, we remained silent, because we believed in the mission. But then you show the audacity to barricade the content with a Javascript banner, forcing the majority of visitors to either donate or spam via facebook or twitter. This is a blatant violation of what Wikileaks should stand for. We will not stand up for this anymore. Instead we will let leaks speak.
That being said, it is time that we move forward. All of us. There is far too much at stake for these folly disagreements and we do not want to see some feel torn between Wikileaks and Anonymous. That is not fair to those people. Anyone has the choice to support Anonymous, Wikileaks, neither or both. Any division is meaningless as we are divided by zero.-
Mon Oct 15 04:19:15 UTC 2012
Basic solidarity in WikiLeaks & Anonymous.


Read the Julian Assange statement in the original link or in the previous post:


  • Guest
Re: AnonymousIRC statement regarding WikiLeaks
« Reply #17 on: October 23, 2012, 13:49:51 PM »
Another developement of the situation:


Anonymous hacktivists to launch TYLER: ‘WikiLeaks on steroids!’ – exclusive interview, part 1
Oct 22, 2012 18:14 Moscow Time

In an exclusive interview to the Voice of Russia a member of Anonymous talks about the conflict that revolves around the coercive fund raising techniques and a lack of transparency regarding WikiLeaks.

He also mentions the possible release of a list of what they view as WikiLeaks ethical violations. On December 21, 2012 Anonymous are planning to launch a secure, no cost and decentralized online leaks release platform called TYLER to circumvent to problems inherent in WikiLeaks and to continue to disclose information that governments, including US, are hiding from people.

After writing my article on a rift between WikiLeaks and Anonymous in which I asked Anonymous and WikiLeaks to contact me regarding the situation Anonymous was kind enough to do so. I requested an audio or studio interview but this was impossible due to their security concerns. We agreed on an e-mail interview, below are the results of the first part.

Anonymous: It is important that these questions are being answered as "Anonymous". At a later time if you would like to interview me regarding my own situation that might be possible, but on this issue I am acting as part of the Anonymous collective.

Robles: "Can you tell us any other reasons that have not been publicized as to why Anonymous has decided to part ways with WikiLeaks?"

Anonymous: No I think we were fairly clear and straightforward in the press release we forwarded to you. Assange's reply to us via his public statement on Twitter did not help the situation, as it was generally viewed as condescending and arrogant. So I would say that has exasperated the rift. Beyond that the conflict revolves around the coercive fund raising techniques and a lack of transparency regarding WikiLeaks finances.

Robles: "There have been statements that Anonymous plans to release secret files about WikiLeaks, can you give us a few details about these files and what kind of revelations they will provide?"

Anonymous: Actually the exact statement was that we would release a detailed list of what we view as WikiLeaks ethical violations and lack of transparency problems. There was never a statement made that we possessed or would release any "secret files". What we would like to see released, either legitimately or leaked to Anonymous by a WikiLeaks insider - is the WikiLeaks financial records. We do not possess these, but should they be delivered to us we would certainly disclose them. An organization that preaches transparency to the world should provide it for themselves.

Robles: "If WikiLeaks goes down the tubes how do you think this will affect Julian Assange and his current situation?"

Anonymous: In order to approach that question it is necessary first to define what exactly WikiLeaks is. There is a pervasive myth in the media and the world that WikiLeaks is this vast collective of activists making the decisions for the organization. This is not at all true. WikiLeaks is a publishing business that was solely created, owned and operated by Julian Assange. So apart from a few dozen volunteers, and a tiny cohort of employees -WikiLeaks and Julian Assange are essentially the same entity.

Julian has threatened on at least one previous occasion to pull the plug on the project because the fundraising was not meeting his expectations. It was at that time that Anonymous began planning to field our own alternative disclosure platforms. Julian desperately needs WikiLeaks, and he is the only one that can pull the plug on the project. I rather think that so long as he is in dire straights, he will not do so - despite any threats from him to the contrary.

But this does beg the question, since WikiLeaks and Assange are one and the same - what happens to the project should Julian fall? I rather think that would be an end to WikiLeaks.

Robles: "Can you tell us something no one else knows about TYLER?"

Anonymous: I could, but I am not going to. :-P

Robles: "In what ways will TYLER be better than WikiLeaks?"

Anonymous: First, TYLER is but one of several disclosure platforms fielded by Anonymous and it's allies. There is the wonderful Par-Anoia project. And last year we launched LocalLeaks and HackerLeaks with the assistance of the Peoples Liberation Front. All of these platforms have their strengths, and all are important to Anonymous ongoing mission to find a secure, inexpensive and decentralized way to do disclosure.

What makes TYLER unique as a disclosure platform is that it will not be deployed on a static server. TYLER will be P2P encrypted software, in which every function of a disclosure platform will be handled and shared by everyone who downloads and deploys the software. In theory, this makes it sort of like BitCoin or other P2P platforms in that there is virtually no way to attack it or shut it down. It would also obviously be thoroughly decentralized.

Robles: "Was there any special reason for choosing the date December 21, 2012? Some people believe that on that date when all of the planets align and when the Mayan calendar ends, the world as we know it will end."

Anonymous: Yes the date was chosen to align with the Mayan end of the world myth. However, this was done for publicity reasons - not because any of us actually believe the myth.

Robles: "What is the current status of all of the members of Anonymous who were indicted in the US? Can you give us details about where their cases currently stand?"

Anonymous: I will answer the best that I can, however there are others that can answer this question better, such as Jay Leiderman and attorney in California who acts as an un-official legal liaison for Anonymous. And there is an online tracker deployed that follows all the arrests of Anons around the world. But I will share what I know.

The "Anonymous 16" in the USA; this group has one thing in common, they are all indicted for conspiracy, aiding and abetting and participating in Cyber-Sit Ins or DdoS attacks on political targets. One individual is indicted for organizing and facilitating a DdoS campaign against the web assets of the rock musician Gene Simmons of the band KISS for his staunch support of anti-piracy laws and policies. I have no idea where his case stands, but I know that Simmons has openly boasted of his arrest and prosecution. Another individual, known as "Commander X" aka Christopher Mark Doyon - stands indicted for organizing and participating in a DdoS of the Santa Cruz County (California) website in defense of local protesters being oppressed. His prosecution is on hold because he has, rather publicly - fled into political exile in Canada due to the indictment. The remaining 14 individuals are sometimes called separately the "PayPal 14" as they are all indicted for conspiracy, aiding and abetting and participating in the very famous DdoS attack on PayPal in defense of WikiLeaks. Their trial is, much like Bradley Manning's trial – being extremely dragged out by the US prosecutors. It has been over a year since the process began winding it's way through the courts and they are no closer to the trial itself.

Jerremy Hammond, who is alleged to have been part of the LulzSec/AntiSec hacking crew and also an Anon stands indicted for among other things breaching the servers of the private intelligence firm Stratfor and liberating the so called "GI Files" which consisted basically of Stratfor's E-Mail spool. Those files are now featured on WikiLeaks.

Hammond was denied bail, and as with the other Anons his legal process is painfully slow while he languishes in custody. Hammond remains defiant, and will challenge the case to the end I believe.

Another AntiSec hacker known as Neuron recently plead guilty to charges related to the Anonymous breach of the Sony servers in 2011. He is awaiting sentencing. There are several other cases involving LulzSec and another hacking crew called CabinCrew of which I am not familiar.

This is the end of part 1 of the interview…Stay tuned, more to come!

Just an update on WikiLeaks: I have been in regular contact with WikiLeaks number 2, Kristinn Hrafnsson, for the last few months and have conducted several interviews with him which were published here on the Voice of Russia and aired on the Voice of Russia radio. However since the paywall appeared and we published the press release detailing Assange’s wishes to influence the US Presidential Elections, WikiLeaks and Hrafnsson have gone completely silent. We can speculate but we won’t. We have been unable to get a comment from them in any form. I will keep you all up to date if this changes.

‘One man's criminal is another man's freedom fighter’ – Anonymous, EXCLUSIVE interview, part 2

John Robles - Oct 22, 2012 15:01 Moscow Time

In the second part of our exclusive interview Anonymous ventured into more dangerous territory and talked about intelligence agencies, law enforcement, the freedom of the internet, and their views on Russia. Anonymous tells about the nature of their activist movement being so decentralized because of the anarchist ideal of horizontal decision making. Due to security concerns Voice of Russia was not able to provide audio or video.

Anonymous: Below are the second set of questions and answers. As with the last batch, the answers must be attributed to "Anonymous".

Robles: "What is the underlying philosophy of Anonymous?"

Anonymous: Freedom. And the defense of the Internet because it is the greatest tool of liberation in the history of humanity.

Robles: "What would you say to people who say you are criminals?"

Anonymous: What would I say to them? I would shrug and decline the semantic argument. One man's criminal is another man's freedom fighter. Whichever label you choose to attach to us says far more about you than it does Anonymous.

Robles: "Please describe the decentralized nature of Anonymous, why there are no official spokespeople and why this is the case?"

Anonymous: The journalist Quinn Norton really summed it up the best. Anonymous is a "do-ocracy". Certain individuals within the collective will simply start an action or operation and based on how well they sell it to the collective that is how big it will become. Other times a trigger event, such as a massacre or brutal repression of a protest somewhere or the arrest of some prominent freedom of information figure will catalyze the collective and bring key organizers together to plan an operation.

As for the why, that should be obvious. If you tag individuals with the "official" label you paint a big target on them. There is also the anarchist ideal of horizontal decision making involved as well. Our strict adherence to the decentralized concept is one of our greatest strengths.

Robles: "Can you discuss some of the attempts by intelligence agencies and law enforcement organizations to infiltrate Anonymous?"

Anonymous: For law enforcement, the most effective way to penetrate Anonymous is by capturing and then subverting an active known participant. Probably the most well known case of this was the very famous compromise of a popular Anon known as "Sabu". Depending on the influence of the individual "turned", the damage to the movement can be severe - as was the case with Sabu.

As for intelligence agencies, their goals and methods are quite different. There is probably not an intel organization on earth that is not trying to actively penetrate Anonymous. And this is not at all difficult, as we are a very open movement that encourages mass participation by the public. But rather than try and subvert us for the purpose of capturing Anons, the "spooks" are looking for information. Where better to find it than hanging out with "information activists". Depending on who the intel people work for, they might not even be at cross purpose with Anonymous.

Robles: "Can you tell us about the death squads that are hunting Anonymous members and about contracts that have been put out on Anonymous?"

Anonymous: Well known Anonymous organizers are threatened with physical violence on an almost daily basis. We have been threatened by former US Secret Service agents, the secret police in various mid-east countries - and those strange breed in the USA known as "Guardians Of The Republic" or "Patriot Hackers". Then you can also add the random deranged individuals from all over the world. We took on the Zetas drug gang in Mexico last year, and there are a number of outstanding threats and contracts from that confrontation.

Any group or movement that takes action against powerful entrenched interests is going to get this sort of thing, it comes with the territory. But it's not just those involved with Anonymous directly that are in danger, any journalist or academic who takes an active interest in us will also quickly become a target of threats.

Robles: "Can you give us any specifics about FBI/CIA/MI-6 attempts at getting at your people, influencing Anonymous and infiltration etc?"

Anonymous: I think I answered this question above. But I would add that it is not just western intel and law enforcement that are after Anonymous. I would be VERY surprised if Russian agencies were not looking into us. And certainly mid-east and Israeli agencies are very interested in our activities. Turkey in particular has tracked down and arrested quite a number of Anons in that country.

Interpol, the EU - Brazilian agencies. Pretty much ever intel and law enforcement group on the planet at this point is looking closely at Anonymous. With the recent launch of Op Vatican you could even add to the list those vaunted Swiss Guards!

Robles: "Why are your members ready to put their lives on the line for the cause?"

Anonymous: Because somebody has to do it. In every generation, individuals must step forward into danger in order to do battle with the forces of tyranny. Oppression and the greed for power are perennial, which is why revolution must be perpetual.

Robles: "Can you go into some of the steps that the US Government and other governments have gone to in order to control and censor the flow of information?"

Anonymous: Lulz. You could write a book and not cover them all. That is why a project like WikiLeaks and other disclosure platforms are so vital. The use of "national security" to over classify information, primarily to hide corruption and wrong doing - would be one of the biggest techniques.

Another way, and one that is of great concern to Anonymous is the misuse and abuse of copyright laws to impose defacto censorship. Another technique that Anonymous has most prominently been involved in circumventing the past few years is government attempts to filter or shut down the Internet around the world.

Robles: "What is the Anonymous position on the media, on copyrights, on file sharing and on content?"

Anonymous: Our position is that the value of an idea to humanity is more important than it's authorship. Copyright laws, especially since the UN mandated DCMA treaty - are being used towards two very destructive ends. First, these laws are used to enrich a very small group of incredibly wealthy and powerful publishing interests and "artists". And second, these laws are increasingly being subverted for the purpose of censoring dissent.

Robles: "What are some of the other events that are being planned in the context of project Mayhem?"

Anonymous: The release of TYLER. Massive global street protests. The disclosure of "secret" information that will be seriously embarrassing to governments around the world.

Robles: "What country in the world does Anonymous feel has the freest system in the world?"

Anonymous: Iceland.

Robles: "What is the Anonymous position/opinion on the Russian Federation, the Russian net, and the flow of information to, from and within the Russian Federation?"

Anonymous: Russia is a modern and relatively free democratic country. And like all nations its size it has problems, it has issues. And some of those issues are of concern to Anonymous…

Offline trick_track

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 27
  • Gender: Female
  • I am a living question and I seek the truth.
Re: AnonymousIRC statement regarding WikiLeaks
« Reply #18 on: October 27, 2012, 04:17:53 AM »
I like this [Julian Assange's/Wikileaks] statement and find it sincere and truly inspiring. I also like Anonymous reply.

Although, it may not seem strictly related, I thought I will share my personal view...

We share a space together here on Earth as living beings and we distinguish ourselves among other beings as Human Beings. We praise ourselves for our consciousness so as for the free will. In the light of the history, for a long-time human life has been rather a (bloody) struggle, but we do have a wide spectrum of cultural, intellectual and technological achievements that make us greatly proud of being human. Throughout the time we have established imposing sets of values that we love to highlight as dimensions of our sophisticated reality: truth, freedom, peace, love, democracy...

We like to consider ourselves as intelligent and creative creatures, and, anywhere we go, we preach loudly what a great value ‘Live’ is for us… Do we mean it though?... Because if we do, then how come we do not try to understand each other rather than argue? How come we divide, while we should unite and communicate with each other in a respectful and peaceful way? How come do we choose to use such shameful, low and barbaric tactics like threatening others with a war?… How come so rarely we admit a mistake, that we were wrong?... Why is it so difficult to give each other a hand and so easy to slap each other faces with an insult?...

Sadly, disturbingly, this is what is happening - on so many levels... Our little wars are eating away our dignity and grow rapidly into huge wars... Do we notice?... Do we remember what dignity means?... Or, amused by anger, we allow it to rip dignity apart?...

We should be better than that, shouldn't we?... An extraordinary history is behind us - a true abyss of wisdom…

The world we live in is madly broken and lost in a dreadful span of conflicts that contaminated our atmosphere with an unbearable agony, violence, terror, inhuman atrocities, hunger, despair, death more death, and more death... I struggle to find the words to express how I feel when I try to grasp the truth about it… And there may be actually no words that describe it all in the way it should be... It is truly insane and truly terrifying…

Our shallow brained or psychopathic leaders are spending so massive amounts of money on militarization, nuclear and other wrongdoings, while so many innocent children are starving to death... They also spend massive amounts on extraordinary surveillance and many other spreading fear tactics that aim to destroy us and the world we live in... Those who know it understand well that it is a very wrong and very dangerous path...

“A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense [sic] than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.” – Martin Luther King, Jr, “A Time To Break Silence,” April 4, 1967, Riverside Church, New York City

After the experience of the WWII, we should be able to respect own dignity… We should understand that no matter how sophisticated rhetoric one may use, war is a killing machine.‘Engaging’ in war means killing. The word ‘damage’ does not describe the deadly striking loss of innocent lives and can be actually insulting when we remember a mass murder… And there is no dignity in war; war is an insult for dignity, war rips dignity apart and brings death, inhuman death and insane pain.

Some would say that these threats are just the words and that in reality no leader won’t be so shallow minded to use those horrifying weapons… Well… Remembering Hiroshima and Nagasaki could be mind opening… The difference is though that ‘Little Boy’ and ‘Fat Man’ were like toys, if we consider the weapons that are available now…

A little while after US slaughtered Japan from the sky, Ernest Hemingway wisely reflected: "We have waged war in the most ferocious and ruthless way that has ever been waged. We waged it against fierce and ruthless enemies that it was necessary to destroy. Now we have destroyed one of our enemies and forced the capitulation of the other. For the moment, we are the strongest power in the world. It is very important that we do not become the most hated…. We need to study and understand certain basic problems…. and remember that no weapon has ever settled a moral problem. It can impose a solution, but it cannot guarantee it to be a just one. An aggressive war is the great crime against everything good in the world. A defensive war, which must necessarily turn aggressive at the earliest moment is the great counter crime…. We never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified is not a crime. Ask the infantry and the dead."

Truth represents essential ingredient of human dignity. And it is important also on an individual, personal level – being honest with oneself is the first step to connecting with the truth and there is no other way to grasp any meaning of the world, than by embracing the true in own life for a start. Appreciation of the truth opens paths to other life qualities and experiences. Without the intensive desire to look for the truth, our culture and history would remind an insane circus of illusions. Truth is crucial to grasp any sense in life. Truth connects us together or differs us from each other on many different levels, however even despite possibly different opinions, truth still is the key that opens a door to dialogue platform, where other values can be created.

Truth is our chance for peace and humanitarian love. Truth enables understanding and shapes the meaning of freedom and it sets us free from the captivity of destructive power of lies. In a way it works like an engine for humanity: the closer the truth we are, the sooner we move forward. I believe that seeking, understanding, sharing and protecting the truth is simply a duty of a sincere human being. And it is a human duty to protect and embrace peace in the world, and never preach the terror of war…

Lets be human and lets behave like human beings. Lets choose peace and truth. Lets learn from each other, from the past and from our mistakes. Lets share inspiration, knowledge and experience to brake the secrecy wall down so that the truth can shine. There is a long way up the enormous hill of secrecy and cover up that we have to climb in and there are many scary monsters that we have to face if we aim to restore the meaning of justice and feel the joy of being free... Lets be bigger and lets unite. Together we can end the war and this should be our only focus.

"If we don't end war, war will end us."
- H. G. Wells
"In a time of Universal Deceit it becomes a revolutionary act to tell the truth."
- George Orwell