Wikileaks: Disinfo?, page 1

reply to post by antonia

The most glaring problem? The lack of security for it's informants. Both the source for the leaked documents and the massacre video were arrested after the leak. Both of these sources were outed by hackers. Wikileaks does a very poor job of protecting it's sources. Is this on purpose?

John Young is one of Wikileaks’ early founders and one of the organization’s more prominent critics. Here is what he has to say about confidentiality of sources (I recommend the whole interview):

Wikileaks pledges to maintain the confidentiality of sources and stressed that in the presentation over the weekend. Do you offer your contributors the same guarantee?

Young: No. That’s just a pitch. You cannot provide any security over the Internet, much less any other form of communication. We actually post periodically warnings not to trust our site. Don’t believe us. We offer no protection. You’re strictly on your own. We also say don’t trust anyone who offers you protection, whether it’s the U.S. government or anybody else. That’s a story they put out. It’s repeated to people who are a little nervous. They think they can always find someone to protect them. No, you can’t. You’ve got to protect yourself. You know where I learned that? From the cypherpunks.

So Wikileaks cannot protect people. It’s so leaky. It’s unbelievable how leaky it is as far as security goes. But they do have a lot of smoke blowing on their site. Page after page after page about how they’re going to protect you. And I say, oh-oh. That’s over-promising. The very over-promising is an indication that it doesn’t work. And we know that from watching the field of intelligence and how governments operate. When they over-promise, you know they’re hiding something. People who are really trustworthy do not go around broadcasting how trustworthy I am.

alethonews.wordpress.com...

On 911blogger.com are two articles, which follow your line of thinking. I am likewise far from convinced, that Wikileaks is a genuine organization and Assange a trustworthy arbiter.

Latest Wikileaks serving military industrial complex
Chris Floyd skewers Wikileaks

Most of the commentators also are very suspicious of Wikileaks and Assange.

Here is one of the comments posted on that website:

The main stream (CIA controlled) media is giving this a lot of attention and in so doing propping up Wikileaks. Therefore you can be absolutely certain of two things:

1. Nothing that Wikileaks 'leaks' is or will be a threat to them.

2. They'll benefit from it somehow. If Wikileaks were a threat ,they certainly wouldn't draw attention to it! They'd ignore it like 911 Truth.

My guess is that it is sort of a sting operation designed to catch whistle blowers & to contain leaks. It's also a conduit through which they can release information they want released. I can't help but think that the 'P' in TAP (as in pipeline) stands for Pakistan. I could guess they're next. The question is do they come before or after Iran?

911blogger.com...