It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Wikileaks may not be what you think it is...

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+24 more 
posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 09:49 PM
Please note that I am only speculating here based on my recent personal experience.

I have some material that I may be interested in having published, and made public at some point. After seeing the successful publishing of the recent Iraq video I thought this could be an opportunity I hadn't considered.

I can't discus that material now, so please don't ask.

Using s secure computer at a secure location I used this contact/submission form...


I sent two files, a very brief edited video, and a text file.

Almost immediately the computer I was using froze up, and after giving up was forced to shut down.

Then I began to wonder, the recent video release, everything we know about wikileaks... And what we don't know.

What if this is all a scam to get people who may have sensitive or secret information to send it in?

They couldn't have set a better trap, if that is the case.

It all seems a bit too convenient to me now, and I can think of no better way that the intelligence community could set up a front to attract people with information the government wants eliminated or suppressed.

Maybe this was all staged to accomplish that goal?

Maybe wikileaks isn't what we think it is.

There is too much we don't know, and in my case that is disappointing, and a bit worrisome. If I had sent more than the 2 files I did, I would be even more worried.

What do you think of the possibilities here?

[edit on 6-4-2010 by Fractured.Facade]

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 09:57 PM
Hmmm made me think...

i remember a "pawn shop" that was run by A local police dept. and the word on the street was "it was a GREAT place to go..
Funny thing was they NEVER had anything to sell.. only bought things,, until......

Very interesting!!

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 09:58 PM
"Wiki" just doesn't sound too trustworthy to me, but we'll have to wait and see if people start disappearing...

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 09:59 PM
This certainly would be a valid concern to have. If it was me I sure would not want to be getting caught for releasing certain info to an undercover intel group.
Having sensitive stuff and wanting to divulge it would make any normal person a bit paranoid at the least.

With all the different countries showing real anger about wikileaks, and censoring them, I am 99.9% sure they are really legit and not some government skunks, but I could be wrong.

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:11 PM
From the submission page for those who may not bother to click the link...

WikiLeaks accepts classified, censored or otherwise restricted material of political, diplomatic or ethical significance.
WikiLeaks does not accept rumour, opinion or other kinds of first hand reporting or material that is already publicly available.

If your submission matches this criteria we will publish and keep published the document you submitted. The information you submit will be technically anonymized and we do not retain any information on you. We will never cooperate with anyone seeking to identify you.

And the very first thing you see (Top of the page) on wikilinks home page...


Click here to make a secure submission

Which will take you to this form...


Very enticing... almost got me.


[edit on 6-4-2010 by Fractured.Facade]

+17 more 
posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:11 PM
I read your thread And I thought,

HMMMMMM, disinformation.

Seriously, George bush would be really proud of you for this one.

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:18 PM
Check out the thread I made on this very topic.

There is some good replies in there too!

"Is WikiLeaks a TPTB Front??"

Fun discussion for sure!

Any comments I would put here would just be mostly cut+paste from that other thread.

Wikileaks a TPTB Front? I betcha it is!!!

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:19 PM
reply to post by 517.101

And I could easily make the same claim about what you have just posted.

I have no agenda here, just serious questions and doubts... and I have good reason to.

If you feel wikileaks is what they are portrayed to be, have sensitive info that meets their criteria submit it to them...

What do you have to lose?

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:21 PM

Do NOT post it on WikiLeaks!!!

You will prolly end up in Prison before anyone even sees what you are trying to leak!

Post it on ATS (or other websites like this)!!!

ATS is pretty much way safer and I personally will get to see it before it gets deleted.

ATS > WikiLeaks

[edit on 6-4-2010 by muzzleflash]

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:24 PM

Originally posted by 517.101

HMMMMMM, disinformation.

No the disinformation has not really started yet in full force.

WikiLeaks is BUYING Credibility right now. So people will TRUST them.

Then, they will start releasing tons of fake disinfo crap. (Maybe, just a theory).

All I am saying is that we can bury WikiLeaks in conspiracy speculations. It is just too easy to speculate about it!

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link also came out saying they believe wikileaks is a CIA front.

i believe cryptome. you guys can believe whatever you want.

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:26 PM
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:28 PM
Here is some more information about this if you're interested. John Young said he doesn't work with wikileaks anymore because he thinks it is infiltrated or run by the CIA or another intelligence agency. John Young founded Cryptome, a site similar to wikileaks in 1996. His site publishes much more information than wikileaks. Here is a quote from Cryptome:

The original intention of Wikileaks, see the emails, was to become wealthy doing what spies do using the two-pronged practice of public service by secret means, ancient and corrupt. Negative criticism of this is water off the duck's back. It is an obligation of spies and the wealthy to attack their kind, pretending opposition to cloak hand in hand.


He believes that wikileaks will continue and he thinks they are intended to make money and serve as disinfo and intelligence gathering if necessary.
Another quote:

Wikileaks will thrive as part of the public benefit/public exploitation crowd of gov, com, edu, org, un, eu and all the others. Admire the National Press Club two-facer today, secret code words are "national," "press" and "club."

He (Young) also published internal e-mails between himself and wikileaks that show evidence they are getting more money and information than they say. Here are the links.
E-mails 1
E-mails 2

A quote from wikileaks to Young on their intentions:

Near 100,000 documents/emails a day. We're going to crack the world open and let it flower into something new.

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:30 PM
reply to post by Fractured.Facade

The only trick that is being played right now is on you and your paranoid brain by the cia. I guess they already got a hold of you. There goes another patriot down the paranoid toliet bowl.

Your the guy who sees the glass of orange juice in front of your face, but says methinks it's really a glass of milk.

What stage of cia mind altering state are you in then, maybe denial huh.

When are they going to let you go?

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:32 PM

Originally posted by LurkerMan also came out saying they believe wikileaks is a CIA front.

i believe cryptome. you guys can believe whatever you want.

I believe Me.

And I agree with Cryptome!

They sure are talking sense about this aren't they?

I am with them 100%.

But it may not be CIA, it could be DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency). That is the Pentagon's Intel.

This is almost CERTAINLY the DIA. It's their jurisdiction pretty much.

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:34 PM
reply to post by 517.101

Your talking about orange juice, milk, and paranoia. We're trying to figure out if wikileaks is legitimate. Why do you think John Young is lying about wikileaks? He is at least suspicious of them, maybe you should be too...

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:35 PM

Originally posted by 517.101

this sound like george bush's paranoid 9-11 gibberish, trust no one crap.
You must be one of his gay bots.

No, I said Wikileaks is George's "gay bot" or whatever you call it.

I have to admit, it is funny as heck being called "George's gay bot" when in reality I have been on ATS exposing his crimes for YEARS...

You really need to open your mind to greater conspiracy theories than the ones fed to you on the MSM.

Bush and Obama have no power, nor do they have anything to do with this. They are mere puppets. Public relations representatives if you will.

But funny comment though! It was funny as hell.

+17 more 
posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:35 PM
Who knows who's who or what for sure in this world ...

So far as I know wikileaks has NEVER betrayed a single source, has provided crucial information that has made a REAL difference in this world, several government have tried to shut them down in their countries, pwnd Scientology into oblivion, and for their efforts are practically broke and operating at minimal capacity.

Could they be in with the spooks ... who knows.

But they've never posted a lie that I know of and never outed a source.

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:35 PM
reply to post by 517.101

it was obvious when wikileaks made their big "april 5th debute" show campaign...and all the theatrics with "help us decrypt this government cover up!!!" give me a break.

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:36 PM
The topic of this thread is: Wikileaks may not be what you think it is... NOT other members. Keep to the topic or your post will be actioned.

Thank you.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in