Wiki Leaks: Video Of Government Shooting Journalists

page: 9
479
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by constantwonder
Since when did ATS start believing in tweets and blogs?


Since the tweet itself is from Wikileaks, not from some random tweeter/blogger.

For all the people claiming marketing/publicity stunt, I'd love to get your take on this:

What does Wikileaks stand to gain if they talk up a video which does not exist? I mean sure, 'there's no such thing as bad publicity', but when a site is non-profit and completely dependent on perceived integrity, what could they possibly stand to gain by risking said integrity?




posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   
I don't have the whole story here, so i cannot say much other than i don't know much.

I can say, to those who claim the reputation of Wikileaks is pristine, that Steven Greer was at one time highly respected, too. Then he veered off the road.

I actually hope it is a hoax, if only to prove to me that maybe this scary world we live in isn't quite as scary. But i don't think that is reality. And if these guys are right, expect that the US will forever be changed both from within and abroad.

In short, someone will lose reputation. Either Wikileaks (if they are wrong) or the USA (if they are right). Neither choice is desirable.

[edit on 26-3-2010 by bigfatfurrytexan]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 06:01 PM
link   
I am not going to say that the video DOESNT exist, but my skeptical nature forces me to wonder:


"if they have a video that shows government corruption, then why go on a media campaign to get attention and money, and wait 2 weeks to release it"?

Sounds like "I have a video of a real Alien, but you can't see it until i have money" to me.

But - if April 5th comes around, and the video looks legit, then i'll eat my hat.

Until then, i'm calling shenanigans.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   
The reason they are probably sitting on this video is because if they release it on their website no one is going to care except the few thousands of people that follow that site.

If they wait a few weeks for the press conference when all of the press is watching, they will pretty much be forced to talk about it.

Releasing it without publicity wouldn't benefit them. Releasing it with publicity will assure that the message will get out.

Telling people 2 weeks in advance that they have the video also gives them a bit of security, obviously, if the CIA shuts down the site it will raise eyebrows.

Now the true test will be if the guys are let into the building.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 06:23 PM
link   
April 5 is a date to me like Dec 25 is to a 5 year old. I know 911 was an inside job and I know the Government has been up to no good for decades. Problem is that there has not been concrete proof. I hope April 5 will produce a video that will allow those of us who know to have the "ah ha" here is what a smoking gun looks like to non believers. The sooner the non believers become believers is the sooner our sick nation can start healing. The truth is out there I just hope that this release this will start proving us right beyond a shadow of doubt to the non believers. I want to see the country our forefathers tried to create for everyone to be able to feel equal and safe to follow Life, liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness with out fear for the future of our children!

Roll on April 5th!!!!

Many Stars n 1 Flag to many posts in this thread by the OP!!!

Just hope Santa doesn't put a lemon in my stocking!!!!



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by IceHappy
...I know 911 was an inside job and I know the Government has been up to no good for decades. Problem is that there has not been concrete proof. I hope April 5 will produce a video that will allow those of us who know to have the "ah ha" here is what a smoking gun looks like to non believers. ...


Wikileaks needs to get their hands on the rest of those Pentagon tapes! My God, could you imagine if they showed something other than a passenger jet...



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   
all i got to say is "where's the beef" ?
until the video shows up we have nothing but words.

[edit on 27-3-2010 by paradiselost333]



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 03:16 PM
link   
April the 5th apparently when it comes out.

Due to it being goverment free day or something.

[edit on 27-3-2010 by jonnyc55]



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by paradiselost333
 
Maybe only words so far, but they are well respected amongst the serious mainstream press, in fact they could be a major source of insight into the power players.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   
Aside from ONE BLOG (I believe blogs are as useful as a high school newspaper) is there any proof of this?



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomis_Nexis
Aside from ONE BLOG (I believe blogs are as useful as a high school newspaper) is there any proof of this?


Look, I understand the tendency to doubt the reliability of blogs (although with the proven fact-checking ineptitude and obvious bias of the MSM, it's hard to believe any news source to be reliable), but the first four lines of the OP show a tweet from Wikileaks itself.

In addition, the Wikileaks page contains this info:


Over the last few years, WikiLeaks has been the subject of hostile acts by security organizations...

But the increase in surveillance activities this last month, in a time when we are barely publishing due to fundraising, are excessive. Some of the new interest is related to a film exposing a U.S. massacre we will release at the U.S. National Press Club on April 5.


If you're after proof that Wikileaks are claiming to have this video, and planning to release it April 5, there you have it.

If you're after proof of the existence of the video itself, what proof will suffice other than the video itself? Until it is released, there can be no absolute proof of its existence, but the past track record of Wikileaks and, as I have mentioned before, the fact that Wikileaks only stands to lose credibility if their claims prove to be false must lend some credence to their claims.

Yes, there is some degree (a large degree in fact) of speculation. But this is not just some random faceless blogger making claims. The claims are made by Wikileaks.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomis_Nexis
Aside from ONE BLOG (I believe blogs are as useful as a high school newspaper) is there any proof of this?


You could look up Wikileaks own site and take it from there,

www.wikileaks.com...-claims

Just so you can know, (proof) that the Twitter blog is coming from Wikileaks. As to the actual story Wikileaks is talking about, the ball is in their court. Any proof there, would need to be something confidential and written about by the CIA as a Modus Operandi. A video showing that MO in practice would be the confirmation.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by TheStev
 


So I'm expected to completely dis-concern the media yet take the word of a blogger seriously and fact.


And let's say it is true all true, that journalists were killed, let's say the facts are true on that....now what about the facts that it was deliberate? Accidents happen, like when a US jet fired and killed Canadian soldiers, hell, maybe that was purpose too!! Geez.


And as a parallel. If I owned a company, and I screwed something up within that company and some douche tries to hack my computer network to find out what I screwed up....yeah, I'd beat the crap out of him too.

[edit on 27-3-2010 by Tomis_Nexis]



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   
You're twisting my words. I never said you should trust a blog, simply that you can pretty much trust a blog as much as you can trust the MSM - which is not much. My view is take everything with a grain of salt - question everything. You're the one who singled out blogs as untrustworthy, implying that there are other sources more trustworthy. I say everything should be questioned, be it blog, Fox News report, or BBC report.

But that's besides the point, my main point was that there is more than just 'a blog' to prove Wikileaks claim to have this video. Wikileaks call it a video of a 'massacre', now perhaps that's sensationalism, but there's really no point speculating on the content of the video. Let's just wait and see. All I'm saying is that it looks pretty certain that this video does exist, and judging by the ramp up of covert activities against Wikileaks, it's a pretty serious video.

And as to your analogy, if your company was public then you would have a duty to reveal your 'screw up' to your stockholders. Every US citizen is a stockholder in the US Government, therefore they have a right to know about any 'screw ups'.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by TheStev
 
Hi Stev,
Tomisn is deliberately placing emphasis on "THE BLOG" when it is clear that the source is Wikileaks using Twitter. There is no debate, just rhetoric.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by smurfy
reply to post by TheStev
 
Hi Stev,
Tomisn is deliberately placing emphasis on "THE BLOG" when it is clear that the source is Wikileaks using Twitter. There is no debate, just rhetoric.


Besides, ad hominem applies to the debater as well as their topics. Attacking the validity of a source by calling into question things like motives or how well established they are is silly, fallacious, and low brow.

Either the information is true or not, regardless of how much the mouth that tells it likes to lie.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by smurfy
reply to post by TheStev
 
Hi Stev,
Tomisn is deliberately placing emphasis on "THE BLOG" when it is clear that the source is Wikileaks using Twitter. There is no debate, just rhetoric.


Besides, ad hominem applies to the debater as well as their topics. Attacking the validity of a source by calling into question things like motives or how well established they are is silly, fallacious, and low brow.

Either the information is true or not, regardless of how much the mouth that tells it likes to lie.
I agree, and the high school "confidential" reference, just fell out of the sky! I wish I had a high school blog when I was at school


[edit on 27-3-2010 by smurfy]



posted on Mar, 30 2010 @ 07:56 AM
link   
To all those who doubt the veracity of the tweets and blogs, then this information, which I couldn't see in this thread, adds lots of gravitas to the story.

It is written by wikileaks editor Julian Assange and dated the 26th March.

He talks in detail about the surveillance and re-iterates that the video will be shown on the 5th April. it's a long piece so I only quote a paragraph below.

Roll on the 5th.

psychoanalystsopposewar.org...




Our production meeting used a discreet, closed, backroom, because we were working on the analysis of a classified U.S. military video showing civilian kills by U.S. pilots. During the interrogation, a specific reference was made by police to the video—which could not have been understood from that day’s exterior surveillance alone. Another specific reference was made to “important”, but unnamed Icelandic figures. References were also made to the names of two senior journalists at the production meeting.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
I have to agree with Snarf. For quite some time now, WikiLeaks has been after one thing:
Money, money, money, money, money.

Aren't we all.

When 4/5 rolls around, if they don't produce something spectacular, they're credibility is going to take a good blow.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Simple question, which I don't think has been asked. Do we have a group of journalists who have disappeared/turned up dead? If the video shows a group of journos being executed then surely somebody since then has missed them?





new topics
 
479
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join