Wikileaks: Disinfo?

page: 2
23
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Personally I think the biggest clue should be the fact that it's all over MSM. I mean come on. They're playing this Afghanistan thing like it's Brittney Spears cutting her hair. Anytime I see anything on the MSM like that, red flags go off for me.




posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   
I used to defend Wikileaks, but not anymore.
Ted Bundy had everyone fooled too, and he turned out to be a serial killer.
So, yeah, I feel for anyone caught in that trap.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 


I hear ya. And thanks for the 3rd paragraph- didn't know that. Guess my point is... the nerve of them threatening 52 years of prison for "oh my gawd you leaked this top secret stuff" (that we all knew anyway) but instead of saying "hell no" to the NY Times, it's "meh... go ahead, spread the word!" It's the principle of the thing. Ok, I get it, they HAVE no principles!



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   
I haven't read any of the new 90,000 documents on Afghanistan, but I don't understand how everyone keeps saying all of the material is nothing new?!?!

Out of 90,000 incidents documenting military mishaps which lead to the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians there has to be something new that will shed some new light on how incredibly inhumane our military industrial complex operates in this day and age.

Yeah,
There is nothing new for people with common knowledge and an imagination about the war, but NOW WE HAVE DIRECT PROOF THAT THE MILITARY HAS IN FACT BEEN CARRYING OUT TEN'S OF THOUSANDS OF DEADLY ATROCITIES TO INNOCENT CIVILIANS DURING THE WAR!!!

We have direct proof that they continually disregard their sacrifices of innocent human life and proceed to the next genocide of village after writing a short report on the last.

I don't trust the Aryan looking, CIA stinking Julian Assange either, but COME ON!

It is MSM that is saying, "THERE IS NOTHING NEW IN THESE DOCUMENTS, DON'T BOTHER READING THEM ALL, NOTHING TO SEE HERE!!!"

We can't trust everything Wikileaks throws at us, but we definitely can't trust MSM's first reports on something this jeopardous to our National Security. For F-N-sakes, think of all the information we aren't allowed to know for National Security reasons, and they let this slide?


[edit on 29-7-2010 by tooo many pills]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
If they expedite the destruction of the MIC and the never ending wars that kill and mame the innocent women and children, I'm all for it.

enough is enough already!



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by tooo many pills
 


If you have been reading the papers for the last two years you knew everything contained within those papers. There was proof the military was covered up illegal actions long before this release. There are many questions raised by the manner of it's release as none of these papers can be authenticated. No one here is saying the government is somehow right. What many of us are stating is Wikileaks is being used to selectively release information they want out. These documents paint Iran and Pakistan as hampering the war effort. All of that is rather telling considering the CIA has admitted to drone attacks and the military is finally admitting Spec Ops is running missions in Pakistan. Then there is the "Bin Laden" info right on the heels Clinton proclaiming Bin Laden is alive in Pakistan. All very convenient and I think the CIA/WH is simply trying to drum up another conflict in a backhanded way.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:32 AM
link   
I don't know whether Wikileaks is disinfo or not. And it doesn't seem like anyone else does either. On ATS and other conspiracy-minded sites, progress on any subject is aborted by the inability to believe anything because of the everything-is-a-conspiracy mindset.

However, I, for one, have never seen any evidence that Wikileaks is disinfo. People love to talk about it and talk about the so-called evidence (i.e., baseless innuendo), but I've never seen it. It seems it's just become a real issue by virtue of it being repeated by Internet forum posters ... over and over.

I choose to call a spade a spade until I've looked at the device, compared it to pictures in a Sears catalog and finally realized that, in fact, it's actually a hoe.

The point of Wikileaks being disinfo because they're being covered by the MSM: Huh? How can you win when half the people are criticizing the quality of the leaks as being insignificant? When the MSM thinks it's important enough to cover in the "actual" news, you must be disinfo. Weirdness.

The information is important and a big deal ... except for the issue of the jaded (particularly American) public who just really does not care about these wars or the fact that highly illegal, unethical and inhumane things are going on ... and basically that everything is a lie.

I don't expect Wikileaks (and I don't think it's in their mission statement) to "make" people understand and value the information released. Wikileaks' giant Achilles' heel is that they're too late - humanity's collective attitude is one that doesn't care enough. Apathy is pervasive. Imagine the release of the Pentagon Papers today. I question whether they would bring down a president.

Also, I question blaming Wikileaks for the disclosure of Manning's identity. My understanding is this was 100% the result of Lamo. If a hacker identity is what discredits Assange, perhaps we should look into the past of Lamo (which you can do, a little bit at my Manning-Lamo thread
). His record, in my view, is far from sterling.

[edit on Jul 29, 2010 by Hadrian]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


Then hooray for the CFR. If they're the voice of common sense in this, which is exactly how I read what you said, then they are good guys. At least this time.

I went to a speech once at a CFR meeting. Not "insider" CFR of course, but it was CFR. I think the speech was open to the public, at least anyone dressed appropriately would have been allowed in without a thought. It was held in a big ballroom or meeting room in a hotel. It seemed like normal business people. They weren't scheming to take over the world, they weren't especially evil.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
its info! no its disinfo! No its info! disinfo! info! disinfo!



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 


I agree, the way our military works in the world is widely known, but never have 90,000 different documents been released telling exactly how and what happens during our top-secret missions. Before this we just got the tidbits in the news of a second-third-or-fourth hand telling of our one side of the story.

And I also agree that Wikileaks has definitely been hand selecting the documents they want released, which is fishy to say the least.

I think the MSM's reaction is a dead give away to whose side they are on and working for. They have completely downplayed everything except the Bin Laden/Pakistan/Iran links, which is only helping the war effort, and is the exact opposite of what I think the general consensus should be. Could you link me to the BinLaden/Pakistan info you have read please?

There has to be something new in the 90,000 docs that could seriously damage our conquest of the Middle East, the MSM just doesn't want to be the ones to find it.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by tooo many pills
 


www.telegraph.co.uk...

The American Secretary of State said she believed the fugitive head of the al Qaeda terrorist network was at large nearly nine years after United States forces helped topple his Taliban hosts in neighbouring Afghanistan.

Speaking before heading to the Kabul International conference, she said: "I believe (bin Laden) is here in Pakistan and it would be very helpful if we could take them (al-Qaeda leaders)." Leon Panetta, head of the CIA, last month said bin Laden remained in "very deep hiding"


www.bbc.co.uk...

Several files track Bin Laden, although the US has said it had received no reliable information on him "in years". The details come as the Pentagon investigates who leaked the classified documents, in an act the White House says could harm national security.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 
No flames from me!

I think your points are valid ones. We can't always follow blindly.

Star and Flag!



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Gawd!
Is it just me, or are some of us getting bone weary with the whole bloody mess?
Lately i just feel its time to throw away the laptop, and dump my TV somewhere deep.
Point is, theres NOBODY who ISNT running a selfish double even triple game....The MSM, the PTB, the CFR, the PNAC, the CIA,...fact is its not possible to unravel all the mountain of BS that gets heaped on us from inumerable sources for imumerable selfish special interests.
And behind it all, the bankers are laughing up their sleeves while we all struggle to make some, any, sense of it all......
Time to flee the madness.....get out while you still have some sanity left.
Jullian indeed could be a plant, and Wiki" a sort of honey trap for those whose consciences do not have the iron rich constitution thats required to serve the beast.....
That said, the devil in is the details....It is one thing to have normal adult reservations about the morality of our conduct abroad, and another to have the details in stark relief thrust upon you...
Any light on a dark situation is better than none.So i say keep em comming, but lets take a grain of salt with that too.
The only thing that really brings answers to these deep games is time.
Pity its too late to do anything about them by then.I hope our children learn from all this....



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   
What if they are using this instance and others like it as more of an excuse to need to control the Internet. They say info like this is a threat to national security and they need to be able to stop it from getting out, what better way than controling the Internet? Just a thought.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 



Originally posted by antonia
Then you have the spin on the stories themselves. They seem to single out Iran and Pakistan. It almost [bseems like this is perfectly timed to start pointing fingers at a new enemy at the tail end of the CFR faction saying the war in Afghanistan is a failure.

So, I ask: Is it possible we are all being duped by Wikileaks?


Give you a little more perspective. Devil is in the details. If the owner of Wikileaks was an actual journalist, he would realize that the informaiton he obtained was planted. Other words, he allowed himself to be used as an instrument, so that the US government can 'accidentally' leak out sensitive information.

As a result of people following the owner blindly, without questioning the possibilities, 'everyone' who believed in this guy were 'lead' down a rabbit hole.

Sure, the information he obtained is legit, but the site owner will never admit in being used. While the site owner thinks he is an activist, the government sees him as a useful and expandable tool.

People have to remember Wikileaks is a hobbyist website, and all that informaiton was either planted (legit info) or faked.

Obama's Administration saw an opportunity, and they exploited a useful tool to get something they wanted. It worked.

Added: I am willing to bet everything on Wikileaks is planted (legit) information, or someone has faked the intelligence to divert people away from something else.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by Section31]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Great thread... As soon as I saw CNN and all major media sources covering Wikileaks latest find I smelled a Rat... There is no reason for Wikileaks to get this kind of attention if it did not serve the 'Powers that be'... Also, Wikileaks talks about having many people around the world that it employs. Where would it get the funding to pay these people? I feel bad for any sucker that uses Wikileaks to whistleblow, as they will be immediately turned over to the authorities.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Wow, Chaos Computer Club...I haven't heard that name in a while. There's a great book called The Cuckoo's Egg, written by Cliff Stoll, about his long journey in observing, trapping, and catching a German hacker. That hacker had some association to the Chaos Computer Club, and was very active in infiltrating computers around the world, prior to the Internet, in an effort to procure top secret data and information. If I remember correctly, the Chaos Computer Club didn't do as much of that has the hacker in question did, but they did do some things which were not exactly considered good. Definitely recommend reading that book if you can get your hands on a copy.

Anyway, not exactly Wikileaks related, but I thought I'd share what I remember about Chaos Computer Club.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by John_Q_Llama]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by oniongrass
 

At least this time is right and KEY.

There's overlap in the groups or factions, and you have to watch closely to see how they align.

They themselves have NO qualms about temporarily aligning with those they might generally differ with if they can get what they want out if it. Sometimes I think we would be well advised to do the same.

I think that's what makes all of this so confusing too...just when you think you've figured out who's doing what and for what purpose...BAM! It looks like everything's changed. That's a tactic too.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by tooo many pills
 

Generally you can tell which "side" they're on, but once in a while they throw out a ringer.

Mostly you can tell by which media is reporting what. We're all mostly familiar with which ones follow the PNAC/neocon/AIPAC/Zionist agenda and which don't. I seem to have a bit of trouble discerning the difference when it comes to the media in the UK.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:50 PM
link   
I've never been particularly impressed with wikileaks. I was impressed by their ability to constantly avoid lawsuits (possibly because of their connections), but was turned off when they started to post private information, and the information about scientology never impressed me. Their 9/11 "phone calls" thing was a hyped up non-story. Aside from the suspicious call from "Condi" there was really nothing at all to add to the 9/11 information despite these supposed phone calls that came from some unknown source (more private information). when wikileaks was asking for donations, I didn't donate, nor did I really want to help them. The pentagon video was impressive, and supposedly these 90K docs are just the beginning, so we'll just have to wait and see.





top topics
 
23
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join