Clinton talks to China about Wikileaks release

page: 13
90
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Clark Savage Jr.
 


Debate club my a$$!
I said plenty, you still have your fingers in your ears!

All the guy does is release information TPTB would rather you not hear about.

His motivation doesnt matter
You think he's going to try to bring down world governments, and take over like a Bond villian?

Hah!

The crux of this issue is you either want the truth, or you don't. Its not about whos right or wrong, its about facts. Without them how can anyone come to a rational conclusion about anything. As far as it goes, all wikileaks has done is release facts - as far as I know thats true, if you know different please give an example.
How much more is that than the msm can say?
I don't want to embrace him, I would shake his hand, and I'd sooner believe him than Rupert Murdoch/Glen Beck et al.

As far as motivations are concerned - you talk as if Assange is the source of wikileaks material - thats not the case. Therefore you have to question the motivations of all contributors, and of course they will all have different reasons.

IT DOESNT MATTER BECAUSE WHAT WE NEED IS THE TRUTH!

Unless Assange/wikileaks are caught out in a deception, I can see no reason for ANYONE of an inquiring nature to want him/it suppressed, unless they have a vested interest in the status quo.

My apologies if that all sounds too simple for you, I'm trying to find a way to penetrate your self delusion.




posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   
I've been trying my best to figure out this whole thing.
The one thing I keep coming back to is this...If I had info, good, credible info, why would I wait?
I mean if my goal was to "free" the truth, why not flood the media in truth? Why play this trickle of info game?
I'm not saying Wiki is anything other than what it is, but it seems the motive is askew...

I guess if it was me, and I had been given that info, I would have just put it all out there, not given anyone time to consult, prepare, or brace for... I would just have done it.

Just my 1.5 cents (de-value of the dollar)



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Icerider
 


First off, twice you have insulted me unprovoked friend. I don't expect that to happen a third time.

Second, I have not said anywhere I wanted him or his information suppressed. I said I want him ----being the public face of this situation----to explain exactly why the hell he is releasing this information, from where he suspects it comes from, and what he hopes to accomplish long term from this release.

If YOU choose to accept it is for purely altruistic measures then possibly you need to ask yourself why you believe that.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Hocus-Focus
 


Exactly, and better put than I have managed apparently, lol



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Clark Savage Jr.
 


Aw hell, sorry. Didn't mean to toe step. Must have passed you by on my 3 attempts to get through this thread without having to start over lol.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hocus-Focus
reply to post by Clark Savage Jr.
 


Aw hell, sorry. Didn't mean to toe step. Must have passed you by on my 3 attempts to get through this thread without having to start over lol.


No problem, I trip over my own feet most days anyway. lol. You simplified what my point has been from the start.

It is an interesting thread, no question, And it is proving divisive to say the least



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clark Savage Jr.
reply to post by Icerider
 


First off, twice you have insulted me unprovoked friend. I don't expect that to happen a third time.

Second, I have not said anywhere I wanted him or his information suppressed. I said I want him ----being the public face of this situation----to explain exactly why the hell he is releasing this information, from where he suspects it comes from, and what he hopes to accomplish long term from this release.

If YOU choose to accept it is for purely altruistic measures then possibly you need to ask yourself why you believe that.




Bradley Manning (the actual leaker) has already attested to what his motivation was, and Assange and Wikileaks (just passing on the info) have as well. If you've been keeping up with the news and been on WL website, you would know this.

I'm much more interested in knowing the motivations of those who have power/authority/governance over the populace in their respective countries, especially mine. Their motivations/lies/secrets are what got them in this mess to begin with. lol

If you do the right thing, because it is the right thing to do, then you are in the right.

If you do the wrong thing and cover your ass with lies and secrecy then you and anyone helping you keep your secrets are wrong.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Hocus-Focus
 


Maybe he is trying to blackmail TPTB? Who knows? If he really has got them on the run then good on him, and as long as he keeps releasing, WTF.
Alternatively it may be that he is trying to avoid causing too much damage, which is what some of you seem to fear, and so the information is released in a controlled manner. Its important to think outside the box, you know, beyond our own little desires - maybe he sees a bigger picture?

I dont CHOOSE to believe anything, particularly, but I sure as hell have more faith in Wikileaks than Fox, and I know which one I would bet TPTB control.

CS Jr - Not sure what 'insults' you refer to, but I assure you I'm trembling in my boots, lest I should do it again!

Just why SHOULD he explain himself, his motivations etc - he's an editor, a journalist, if you allow, and why should he have 'suspicions' as to his sources - just because he doesnt share them with you, doesnt mean he doubts their integrity. Again, journalists don't reveal sources, they protect them.

Again what I do or do not believe is irrelevent, as long as what we read is true there's no cause to complain, and the alternative - no information - is unacceptable.

"Second, I have not said anywhere I wanted him or his information suppressed".

No, what you said was

" Assange and his ilk that are ultimately going to prove to be the larger menace to all of us. Innocent and corrupt alike'

So you dont want suppression, but he is going to be the nemisis of the world?

I don't feel at all threatened by the truth, but then I have nothing to hide.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by AvireX
Guys is it safe to d/l that torrent thats up?

i'd love to see what is documented and see what the hell has been going on over the years but im just really afraid men. call me paranoid but if this is indeed leaked out govt stuff i just dont want to dive head first then next thing you know im shot while enjoyin a smoke outside feel me?

is there any other way of getting this besides torrent? another file host perhaps...


I got in trouble with Universal for downloading an episode of Battlestar Galactica using BitTorrent three years ago. Don't download anything controversial from BitTorrent. They are watching.

You could probably use your wits to find a safer alternative.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Icerider
 


It's not suppression, its accountability for the potential aftermath that I am addressing.

If, in this newest sideshow, where leaked information is called' world altering, history changing 'and such, is that explosive then the leakers also without doubt must share responsibility for whatever ensues.

I am truly surprised the point is being missed by some here. Wikileaks or Assange can NOT be allowed to not be held accountable for their own actions anymore than the governments can. If the man and his followers have information that is the game changer THEY claim it is, then they need to be FULLY OPEN regarding everything concerning that info. Where it came from, what they think it means, what effect they think the releasing might have--every bit of that and more.

Or they become the same damned thing they are 'exposing'.

Seriously, IR, do you disagree with that ? if so, why?



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:29 PM
link   
I firmly believe that Julian Assange's main motivation is The Hacker Ethic.

en.wikipedia.org...

There was a time...I came out of that time. Julian Assange came out of that time.

I believe it is as simple as that.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by windwaker
 


Use I2P or Peerblock to disguise your IP when downloading a torrent.

Tonight or tomorrow the files are meant to be released, its Sunday [AM//GMT] here. I have a feeling the files will be released any time soon, around the next few hours (-10hours or so). Can't wait to get my teeth sank into them.

Wikileaks - First Intelligence Agency of the People!


I am a bit worried about the D-level though, but this is a test folks; if we shut up now and don't help make those files go viral, and research them to find things out and expose them - then all is lost. Finally we the people get to play ball and I don't mean fragging rags!



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Fractured.Facade
 


Shutting down Wikileaks is easier said than done. They have servers in Sweden which legally protects freedom of information and whistleblowing. Then they have servers all around the world.

I don't think that people doing the work on the scale that Wikileaks does would just do it from there house, it's a lot harder to do this type of stuff, specifically obtaining the information and protecting their sources.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clark Savage Jr.
reply to post by Icerider
 


It's not suppression, its accountability for the potential aftermath that I am addressing.

If, in this newest sideshow, where leaked information is called' world altering, history changing 'and such, is that explosive then the leakers also without doubt must share responsibility for whatever ensues.

I am truly surprised the point is being missed by some here. Wikileaks or Assange can NOT be allowed to not be held accountable for their own actions anymore than the governments can. If the man and his followers have information that is the game changer THEY claim it is, then they need to be FULLY OPEN regarding everything concerning that info. Where it came from, what they think it means, what effect they think the releasing might have--every bit of that and more.

Or they become the same damned thing they are 'exposing'.

Seriously, IR, do you disagree with that ? if so, why?




So are you holding every journalist to this same standard? or are all other journalists allowed to not name their source. We already know Wikileaks source, so that point is mute in this instance. We know where the info came from. So that's answered. From all I've discerned, they seem to believe the effect of releasing such information will be that the public will now be aware of truths they were not aware of before.

Now how do they become the same damn thing they are exposing? They are exposing dirty deeds and secrets otherwise being witheld from those they represent. It's simply not possible. lol

Now if you want to fret about what it could mean for them to expose dirty deeds, well then do that. I could care less. If there weren't dirty deeds to begin with, then there would be nothing to fret about. lol



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:35 PM
link   
I suppose all of us readers need to get some shut eye.

I hope that they have an online db the way they did the iraq files.

That was sliick, and helpful, and this many files is going to be a doozy to wade through.

I doubt ther is no way the newspapers have really went through them. It will be up to 'US.'

I really hope Alex Jones will cover this. He has really got an audience lately with the TSA stuff.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   
"Just why SHOULD he explain himself, his motivations etc - he's an editor, a journalist, if you allow, and why should he have 'suspicions' as to his sources - just because he doesnt share them with you, doesnt mean he doubts their integrity. Again, journalists don't reveal sources, they protect them."

This is where, to me, it falls apart, however.

Most journalists don't have trailers, teasers and proclaim 'world altering' events will be the result of their actions. The scope is what is important here. Watergate wasn't 'world altering' in the context of this hype.

The man truly is either an ego driven charlatan or he must be open as to his motivations given the scope and scale of his statements. That is the right thing to do if motives are purely for the betterment of people.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by the_denv
 


Would you mind please telling me the best program to download the files. I have downloaded them and all I come up with is an empty file.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoAngel2u
reply to post by the_denv
 


Would you mind please telling me the best program to download the files. I have downloaded them and all I come up with is an empty file.


You downloaded the 1 gig or so file?

If you did.. then thats all you can do right now is house it on your machine.. until the password is released to open it.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 



In my opinion, yes, every journalist that makes the type of statements regarding the importance of their work on that scale should be held accountable, yes.

Now, let's try to think of one that has made comparable claims......
edit on 11/27/2010 by Clark Savage Jr. because: (no reason given)



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

Originally posted by Clark Savage Jr.

Most journalists don't have trailers, teasers and proclaim 'world altering' events will be the result of their actions. The scope is what is important here. Watergate wasn't 'world altering' in the context of this hype.

The man truly is either an ego driven charlatan or he must be open as to his motivations given the scope and scale of his statements. That is the right thing to do if motives are purely for the betterment of people.


Riiiight, so most journalist don't have headlines? They don't have teaser printed up to let you know a story is coming up, or to be continued with a teaser? COME ON lol

There has NEVER been a journalist in history with this much information to impart to THE WORLD. lol

Soooooo he has an ego? So what? lmao





new topics
top topics
 
90
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join