Doubt it, the justice systems around the world are complete BS and provide fictional justice to appease the people so it's very easy to pay off someone or have a government agent play the part of an innocent victim then disappear after a trial. Wikileaks has destroyed the "amazing image" that the US government imagined it had and basically destroyed them. Luckily, even if he went to jail, Wikileaks is not going anywhere, at all. There is zero way to stop the leaks, and no way to take down the website due to the mirrors. The US government cannot police the world like they want, so they fail, and even if they successfully policed the current internet a second internet would be made.

Actually, they're on the verge of financial bankruptcy and a systematic crash because a ton of people left before all this shit happened including the co-founded because they all saw Julian Assange as a "Megliomaniac who was putting his own celebrity ahead of the work.."

They created http://openleaks.org/

Which is more likely to survive.

If you read the actual police reports and look at the evidence... he seems very guilty... and with him now blaming a "worldwide jewish conspiracy" against him....

Yeah.  Meglomaniac who is putting his own celebrity ahead of the work seems pretty apt.  The whole "world conspiracy theory" is nothing but Assange's persecution complex coming to light, and the reason why wikileaks was crumbling even before the diplomatic leaks happened.

Doesn't help either that they employ a holocaust denier.

Something that would probably be an enlightening read. http://globalcomment.com/2011/lara-logan-julian-assange-two-cases-of-rape-culture/

I'll blame the article I read then what financial institution would be exposed was generalized and vague just the way American news sources think Americans like it.

It's supposed to be Bank of America by the way.  It's been alleged they were even planning "Cyber attacks" on wikileaks and related companies to be proactive.  Based on a power point online.  Not sure how much validity it holds since anyone could make a power point but who knows.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/technologylive/post/2011/02/bofa-denies-connection-to-proactive-tactics-to-silence-wikileaks/1

You really have an agenda against Wikileaks don't you?

Notice that most people from the US are much more against Wikileaks than most of the world.

That's true, however I've seen quite a few Americans support Wikileaks for what they actually do. At the end it's benefitial for everyone, don't know why they attack an organization that does nothing but show the miseries and abusive practices of EVERY country, not just the US. I feel like the USA is the one that has to lose the most by these leaks and many USA purists don't like this.

And BTW, this coming straight from Openleaks website

6. How and why is OpenLeaks different from WikiLeaks?

OpenLeaks is based on a more decentralized concept. We do not seek to publish information ourselves, but rather to enable third parties to do so. The public already trusts them, with their existing capabilities and experience to analyze and work on submitted material. We, in effect, simply enable them to receive information that they otherwise might not get access to in their local jurisdictional environment.

OpenLeaks is not involved in the direct editing and release of documents. Our intention is to function, as much as possible, as a mere conduit (akin to the telephone exchange and the post) between the whistleblower and an organization of their choice. This means that OpenLeaks does not accept submissions or publish leaked material directly.

There are two major parts to the process of leaking: submission of material and publication of it. By concentrating on the submission part we attain two desirable goals: 1) increasing the security for all parties involved, 2) improving scalability by minimizing bottlenecks and reducing complexity in our organization. To better understand this process and its difference to how other whistleblowing platforms work, watch our video.

OpenLeaks is, therefore, not an enhancement of, or a replacement for, WikiLeaks, nor is it a competitor. Rather, it is a complementary project providing capabilities other than those that WikiLeaks does, or can, provide.

7. What is your relation to WikiLeaks?

A number of us were previously involved with WikiLeaks. None of us has any remaining association with WikiLeaks, and all of us had left by the end of September 2010 (despite other claims). While we fully support the stated goals of WikiLeaks, and wish them success, OpenLeaks is an independent project.

Yep, I usually only catch news on Sundays though and honestly Asange's just not a priority unless he decides to release insider info on Andrew Cuomo, the Clintons and so on. Then I would enjoy reading about his escapades with impressionable university seminar coordinators. The article I caught on his coming information deluge was from November I think, just goes to show how far away I've been from this drama.

I just answered the poll for this thread and found that 9% of the quarry takers were too serious nearly 32% are trolls and everyone else is just plain silly.

How is "accurately reporting the state of wikileaks" an agenda?

Meglomaniac was an actual quote.  Well the full quote was "Paranoid, Powerhungry, Meglomaniac".

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/global/110210/wikileaks-julian-assange-book-inside-openleaks

I've got nothing against wikileaks, though I think everybody who was worth a damn probably left for Openleaks.

Julian Assange on the otherhand, is someone who is trying to combat very real rape charges with fantastical tales of worldwide conspiracies... which are now apparently jewish conspiracies.

There are very few things more loathesome then someone who plays the "blame the victims" rape defense game... and the number of just outright attempts at lies and spinning they've done, is outright... criminal.

I mean heck, remember the "One lady is a CIA operative" comment?  Guess who started that theory.  It would be the above mentioned holocaust denier.  That works for wikileaks.  Again, actually read the article in the post you quoted.