Wikileaks: Disinfo?

page: 3
23
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Maybe it's disinfo and maybe it isn't? It's far too soon to tell...or form any conclusions.

A lot of people pitch tent on everything being disinfo and see the ingredients on their cornflakes as a CIA mind-control exercise. I doubt them more than I doubt Assange or those associated with wikileaks


Personally, it's a case of step back and see what happens. I'm not jumping to any conclusions just yet. The world needs an outlet for whistleblowers and maybe this is it?




posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   
While I applaud the efforts and intentions of these wikileaking whistleblowers I fear the results of their actions will be extremely detrimental to the security of this country.
I believe it was Icke that once posed the question,
"What if we declared war on a country and nobody showed up to fight?"

That would be ideal in a utopian world of universal peace, a beautiful concept in theory, but this will never work in the real world.
Wiki leaks can only make the world safer if the whistleblowers can guarantee that our enemies will disclose vital amounts of top secret documents as well,
... but they can't and they won't.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   
So far they have done nothing wrong, other then trying to expose the "evil" behind the system. They do NOT provide the context and are simply a messenger. A messenger can not be evil or corrupt as they do not convey their own personal opinions, instead share OTHERS. They simply work like what a REAL news agency would be. Unfilter, raw information...

So I disagree with you completely. So far, they have proven to be on OUR side, if the event changes then we can discuss what the agenda is, until that day (which probably will not occur).... WikiLeak has done us ALL a favor and we should be "supporting" their move as it is to EXPOSE the TRUE EVIL manipulating the scene. The information the expose maybe something we know, but majority of the sheeples have NO idea about.

This is why it is so important to support such move as it will help with mass conscious awaking.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
I was actually just thinking about this the other day. I was about to start a thread on it...

How naive do we have to be to assume that the US government would just sit back and let this guy (Assange) become a sort of folk hero, and make them look bad.

Wikileaks has been all over the MSM lately, we all know how the government and the corps that own these MSM outlets are in cahoots. So lets think about it, if the govt wanted to save face, they could easily shut everyone up and force them to stop talking about the alleged "leaks."

Next, why would it be so hard for them to silence Julian Assange? We've all heard the stories of how the govt agencies will go to GREAT lengths to silence people who either know of, or openly discuss state secrets.

The whole thing stinks to me. Personally, I think if this whole thing was true, Assange would have "committed suicide," or just simply disappeared off the face of the earth. If gangs and mafia groups can accomplish this, I would think it would be laughably easy for the most powerful govt in the world to do so.

In my opinion, this is just a trap to get all the "treasonous" individuals to essentially turn themselves in without knowing it.

Think about it, whats easier: to go hunting and look for tracks, spend time trying to find your target, or to pretend to offer save haven and let them just walk right into a trap.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 

i gonna be agreed with you: too many finger pointing to Iran & Pakistan + what's problem to block website with dangerous info for our friends from cia?



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 


Great post, thanks.

This "classified Information" leak is all the Powers That Be need to authorize Internet monitoring/limitation/control.

I think Wikileaks is very limited as far as what information is disclosed. The way this Afghan Leak is being touted in the Corp. News outlets like CNN and FOX - its all propaganda build-up in a move to limit/control Internet ....and it will all be done for our own safety.





[edit on 29-7-2010 by Mr.Hyde]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Mike Stivic
 


I tend to agree with your "venus flytrap" of informants idea, and here's why.

During the last presidential campaign, we had tons of leaks from the Democratic party and others, some in quite explicit detail, about Obama.

Now, coming up on the elections not only this year, but a new presidential campaign and election, I think the venus flytrap idea carries a lot of validity.

Get rid of the leaks and informants prior to the elections, because I think it is going get dirtier than ever before. By far.


[edit on 29-7-2010 by Libertygal]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:05 PM
link   
I am not sure the extent of the complicity of wikileaks themselves but there is no doubt that the Pentagon could very easily leak the info themselves and in these leaks they could plant disinfo.

We are living in a time now where the public doesn't trust mainstream media anymore and for that matter have pretty much turned mainstream media off all together. Seeing the MSM as no longer being a player, the Pentagon and the CIA would be wise to USE a site like Wikileaks to disseminate propaganda instead.

Wikileaks has established somewhat of a trust with alternative media sources and the internet community in general, so having them push the propaganda, whether knowingly or not, would be very effective. Not only are they reaching the people that are no longer watching or trust MSM but the MSM are also reporting the story using Wikileaks as their sources. It is the best of both worlds.

Like I said I don't know If Assange is CIA but the operation has been around awhile now and he seems to have plenty of resources and can "go in hiding" and travel all over the world so I wouldn't be surprised. But even if he isn't I certainly do think plenty of disinfo and propaganda were injected into these documents by the Pentagon prior to the supposed "leak". Then the Pentagon simply leaked the documents themselves.

Elementary actually.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:09 PM
link   
The leaked Iraq video was pretty powerful and to the point, or do I live in another world? As far as the soldier who was arrested is concerned, he imparted info on what he had done to another blogger, and so was caught by his own volition.
Edit for speling!


[edit on 29-7-2010 by smurfy]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by smurfy
The leaked Iraq video was pretty powerful and to the point, or do I live in another world? As far as the soldier who was arrested is concerned, he imparted info on what he had done to another blogger, and so was caught by his own violition.


That is the way I see it also.

As to the value of WikiLeaks? It's minimal. I still think its about money and the need for attention. I don't buy the martyr angle at all. Imaging how much money this latest leak pulled in to WikiLeaks. All those people who never heard of it going to the site and finding the donate button.

In the US WikiLeaks serves no real purpose. If you have dirt on the Republicans you send it to NBC. If you have dirt on the Democrats, you send it to FoxNews. Once its out, your protected far better than you are if you send it to WikiLeaks. If they reject it, it has no value.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   
I have more than a gut feeling.

Of course, my posting history will more than show that.

wikileaks is not disinfo, it is politically motivated, agenda driven and totally controlled real information leaks.

In time, those who have found out the hard way will come forward as the whistleblowers that will expose wikileaks and Assange for what they are.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   
I have been an observant and open minded but cautious skeptic of wiki-leaks and the man of mystery himself. It's quite obvious almost at times even if you are not looking for it. I don't put any faith in the whole lot of them what so ever.

[edit on 7-29-2010 by PJAmerica]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
I have more than a gut feeling.

Of course, my posting history will more than show that.

wikileaks is not disinfo, it is politically motivated, agenda driven and totally controlled real information leaks.

In time, those who have found out the hard way will come forward as the whistleblowers that will expose wikileaks and Assange for what they are.


That is a cryptic statement, whether it is true or not. The same idea of agenda could apply to you, when there is no meat on the bones. Assange HAS been on telly as part of the disclosures, and may be protected by a goverment, or governments. So, if what you say is true, then the agenda/s are all important.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by smurfy
So, if what you say is true, then the agenda/s are all important.


www.washingtonpost.com...


An interesting note in the Times story concerns WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange: "White House officials e-mailed reporters select transcripts of an interview Mr. Assange conducted with Der Spiegel, underlining the quotations the White House apparently found most offensive. Among them was Mr. Assange's assertion, 'I enjoy crushing bastards.' " Assange told reporters he wanted the material to lead to "new policies, if not prosecutions." His agenda is clear.


Actually its not his agenda, but it is clear.

The white house emailed reporters transcripts of the Assange interview, and US news networks complied with what they wanted reported and what they didn't!

The white house was behind the leaks and plans to fully exploit it to change war policy, criminalize the former Bush administration, and gain political advantage over republicans.

Yes, it is clear!



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Mr. Assange needs to cash in on his sudden rise to celebrity, while he still can, because when his masters are done with him he will likely be eliminated.

A book or two, a compelling life story, anything you can charge for do it while you can, then vanish dude!

When you're no longer useful, you are a potential problem, don't hang around to find out what that means.



[edit on 29-7-2010 by Fractured.Facade]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Theylive1776
ATS, from what a friend who use to work for the F.B.I. says, is a major site visited by the C.I.A., the military, Local News Medias, AT&T Personel, Sprint Personel, Wal-Mart Higher Ups, and the F.B.I.


Um, screw government agencies and media ... a little concerned, though, about Wal-Mart Higher Ups.


Oh lord, if we could only change our screen names without losing all the points and junk, I'd so become:

Wal-Mart Higher-Up

.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beefcake
Wikileaks has established somewhat of a trust with alternative media sources and the internet community in general, so having them push the propaganda, whether knowingly or not, would be very effective. Not only are they reaching the people that are no longer watching or trust MSM but the MSM are also reporting the story using Wikileaks as their sources. It is the best of both worlds.


Well, it seems to me that Wikileaks offers context-free information that is real data. To me, this is not propaganda. You can argue the release of any information, by its very nature, is or can be propaganda, but I personally have no cause to suspect an inordinate bias, nor an ulterior motive, from what Wikileaks has leaked.

Sometimes I feel the only reason anything Wikileaks releases is covered by the MSM is because Wikileaks releases pretty important information, people are on the Internet, see it and discuss it at places like ATS. The MSM kinda has to cover it at this point.

I grew up in a time when the so-called mainstream media actually investigated world events, uncovered stories and distributed news. We all know those days are gone, but they're still going to make a half-buttocked attempt to look like they're reporting news. I think they don't really need any credit here, though.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade

Originally posted by smurfy
So, if what you say is true, then the agenda/s are all important.


www.washingtonpost.com...


An interesting note in the Times story concerns WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange: "White House officials e-mailed reporters select transcripts of an interview Mr. Assange conducted with Der Spiegel, underlining the quotations the White House apparently found most offensive. Among them was Mr. Assange's assertion, 'I enjoy crushing bastards.' " Assange told reporters he wanted the material to lead to "new policies, if not prosecutions." His agenda is clear.


Actually its not his agenda, but it is clear.

The white house emailed reporters transcripts of the Assange interview, and US news networks complied with what they wanted reported and what they didn't!

The white house was behind the leaks and plans to fully exploit it to change war policy, criminalize the former Bush administration, and gain political advantage over republicans.

Yes, it is clear!


What is clear, (again if what you say is true) is that snippets from Der Spiegel was used by the White House. It is not clear that Assange has an alliance with the current White House at all. Last paragraph, and if you are now talking about the Wikileaks themselves, that is just an assertion on your part without explanation. Just because they use quote material from a newspaper, doesn't automatically mean they also did the military leaks. On the other hand, if what you say is true as regards the Wikileaks video, and now the transcripts it's a pretty clever, but easy way of getting to the truth of these conflicts, albeit as long as there is direct tie-in to the former White House. As regards whistleblowers, (not in your post) I like this quote from a John Cole,
"The message is clear – you torture people and then destroy the evidence, and you get off without so much as a sternly worded letter. If you are a whistle blower outlining criminal behavior by the government, you get prosecuted."



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Theylive1776
 


So, conspiracy minded people should be thrown off ATS for suggesting a conspiracy on a conspiracy board. It seems that is what you are saying.





new topics
 
23
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join