Wikileaks starting to smell funny

Originally posted by mayabong
Wikileaks smells of AIPAC

www.veteranstoday.com...

I started a thread on that article about an hour and a half ago:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by GirlGenius

Yes. That's the other thread that I mentioned on Page 1. There I also said the very same what I said here.

2nd line.

Originally posted by Sentinel412
And as I said, I won't say any appology to disinfo agents, because I don't like manipulative liars.

edit on 28-11-2010 by Sentinel412 because: (no reason given)

Calling someone a "disinfo agent" because you disagree with their view of something is intellectually lazy, dismissive, and ultimately paints you with a closed mind.

that term gets tossed around on this website far too much...like sheeple, and shill...sort of a losing argument clarion call.

Debate...disagree...bring your views forward...but don't resort to minimizing the other side as some sort of paid off intellectual trying to brainwash everyone.

If anything, a "disinfo agent" would be the one on your side, screaming loudest, then bringing the conversations intellectual merit down to crazy conspiracy and anger levels..alienating the average person from considering the side due to simple nuttyness.

Time honored tactic...are -you- the disinfo agent?

(see how that works...ghey, isn't it)

reply to post by Sentinel412


Did you ever stop to think people may be smelling a rat and want to discuss it? You did the same BS on my thread (www.abovetopsecret.com...). Grow up and discuss the topic rather than insinuating people are spreading disinformation. It is an interesting question - who is behind this Assange character...

Click here for more information.

reply to post by GirlGenius

Actually this is my opinion about both of you. Sorry, but I won't hide my opinion. And when the release is so close both of you're starting discrediting threads about WikiLeaks which is used to grab the attention of many people, including mine.

Originally posted by dmefoc
reply to post by Sentinel412

 

Are you in the military? No? Am I? Yup.. I think Ill take my experience and knowledge of HOW the military works.

It isnt WHERE you are "posted" that grants your access to information, it is WHO YOU ARE. Everyone in the military is granted with a select level of security clearance, according to their job (mos) and rank. As a PFC, the ONLY information he would EVER have access to is information that has been processed, and gathered and deemed irrelevant if released. The military DOESNT TRUST privates, to be quiet honest with you, the Officers just dont trust enlisted PERIOD. Because WE are taught from day one to have 7 army core values. Integrity is one of them, and if we were to handle classified information that is detrimental or shows misconduct, the GOOD soldiers among us WILL get it out, PERIOD.

So again, when you apologize (please, dont misunderstand I am NOT apologizing to you, I am requesting one from YOU) then you can join this discussion and be responded to propperly, until then, go be a nerd on someone elses thread.

Well, it's possible that is what has happened. No-one has confirmed that Manning is the source. He may not be.

If he did give the info to Wikileaks, he may also have been given this info to protect someone else who would have immediately been suspected.

You don't know all the facts.

reply to post by dmefoc

Sorry, but it's classified information where I was in the military and everything else is also classified regarding this matter. Any other question? But personally I don't really care you believe me or not.

Originally posted by GirlGenius
reply to post by Sentinel412

 

Did you ever stop to think people may be smelling a rat and want to discuss it? You did the same BS on my thread (www.abovetopsecret.com...). Grow up and discuss the topic rather than insinuating people are spreading disinformation. It is an interesting question - who is behind this Assange character...

Sentinel is not stopping you guys from discussing it. Get the facts straight. His opinion is as valid as yours. Grow up!

reply to post by wcitizen


Youve let that moron displace your attention. Read my 2nd post to this thread, Im saying someone that is likely INNOCENT and rather YOUNG seems to be the scapegoat for this release of information, and its not right.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by dmefoc

Innocent or not innocent, young or not young, your thread title is the discrediting one. I also mentioned this. As the PFC was arrested by the Government, not WikiLeaks should smell funny, but the Government. Your thread is misleading and containing reverse psychology.

And I don't give a damn that you're considering me as a loser, because I'm not willing to provide my former rank and any other info regarding my service time.

Originally posted by wcitizen
His opinion is as valid as yours. Grow up!

Actually, I personally find anyone whom calls those whom have a different view or ask questions a disinfo agent to be less valid in their opinions due to an inability to articulate their side of the argument without trying to publically dismiss the opposing viewpoint as some paid off shill.

Originally posted by Sentinel412
reply to post by dmefoc

 

Innocent or not innocent, young or not young, your thread title is the discrediting one. I also mentioned this. As the PFC was arrested by the Government, not WikiLeaks should smell funny, but the Government. Your thread is misleading and containing reverse psychology.

And I don't give a damn that you're considering me as a loser, because I'm not willing to provide my former rank and any other info regarding my service time.

edit on 28-11-2010 by Sentinel412 because: (no reason given)

You have to be trolling. First, if you read my first two posts, you would realize WHAT i am sayin stinks about the wikileaks. NOT wikileaks itself. Second, you are a loser, for PRETENDING you actually had the courage to serve in the military. IF you WERE in the military, it was you went to basic, couldnt handle it and went awol. I know your type, I was a DS and then a Training NCO.

Originally posted by Sentinel412
reply to post by dmefoc

 

Innocent or not innocent, young or not young, your thread title is the discrediting one. I also mentioned this. As the PFC was arrested by the Government, not WikiLeaks should smell funny, but the Government. Your thread is misleading and containing reverse psychology.

And I don't give a damn that you're considering me as a loser, because I'm not willing to provide my former rank and any other info regarding my service time.

edit on 28-11-2010 by Sentinel412 because: (no reason given)

Sentinel...

Do you believe Wikileaks has an agenda pure as snow? Do you believe you live in a world where every single corner is touched with agendas and corruption, yet this one single organization has absolutely no agenda and should therefore not even be considered for speculation as to what agenda they may truely be having?

You seem to be fighting for exactly what your fighting against...no release or consideration of a organizations agenda...supress even speculation about it...

I think the mantra of wikileaks is now one thing...Trust nothing at face value, always investigate, and assume agendas. Seems that is a good plan...and what better place than to start than the organization that is spreading that meme...wouldn't you agree?

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by detachedindividual
Focus on the corruption and dodgy deals, but exposing one governments opinions of another is a little petty.

Again...Wikileaks can do the right thing...remove the nonsense that can cause no good and only damage things without bringing any altruistic truth forward...and release stuff that is relevant only..

but something tells me they are simply too lazy, or perhaps pro-chaotic anarchy to do so...how will their legacy in the pages of history be written...as the organization that brought truth to the world, or the ones whom simply instigated a fight to break out just for fun.

And who determined or identifies "altruistic" truth from "dangerous" truth? People are fallible and can make errors on their judgments/perceptions of good and bad "truths" the only altruistic truth is the full and total "truth" uncensored, manipulated or sugar coated.

If the world goes into complete chaos and anarchy because we all finally know the truth...then that is exactly what needs to happen for the obviously lesson there to be learned. You cannot truly learn or progress with a foundation of "pretty pictures" and censored information. You need the raw unaltered truth of the matter to process and understand so you can then make truly educated and intelligent decision/corrections.

Thought experiment:

If you knew the towers were brought down by American Corporate Interests and not cave dwelling terrorists from "Whateveristan" but decided not to release that information and keep it a secret because there would be a revolution by morning, you are ultimately doing a sever disservice to the progression of those people you are intending to protect. Why? well because you are keeping that information a secret and the people are unaware of where the REAL TRUE THREAT is, they cannot make decisions that protect their interest.

Instead, they create and allow Patriot Acts, and TSA policies and things of that nature.

An uneducated person cannot make an educated decision.

Originally posted by dmefoc
You have to be trolling. First, if you read my first two posts, you would realize WHAT i am sayin stinks about the wikileaks. NOT wikileaks itself. Second, you are a loser, for PRETENDING you actually had the courage to serve in the military. IF you WERE in the military, it was you went to basic, couldnt handle it and went awol. I know your type, I was a DS and then a Training NCO.

You know calling someone as looser when you don't have any valid point is just giving me the right. And whoever was in the military knows those claims what you said is not true, because accessing sensitive materials are not based on ranks, but on your post. It's always worked on this way. If a PFC is working on a highly classified military base, that PFC even has the right to kick the ass out of an officer if that one doesn't have the proper access to the base. Same game rules with sensitive materials. If the PFC is working with intelligence, that one has the right to access sensitive materials, because of his post and assignment.

Originally posted by dmefoc
The Obama administration has told whistleblower WikiLeaks that its expected imminent release of classified State Department cables will put "countless" lives at risk, threaten global counterterrorism operations and jeopardize U.S. relations with its allies.

In a highly unusual step reflecting the administration's grave concerns about the ramifications of the move, the State Department late Saturday released a letter from its top lawyer to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and his attorney telling them that publication of the documents would be illegal and demanding that they stop it.

It also said the U.S. government would not cooperate with WikiLeaks in trying to scrub the cables of information that might put sources and methods of intelligence gathering and diplomatic reporting at risk.

===========================================================================
Translation from doublespeak into plain English:

The Obama administration has told whistleblower WikiLeaks that its expected imminent release of classified State Department cables will put "countless" of our frauds and our lucrative careers at risk, threaten our on-going global terrorist activities and jeopardize U.S. relations with our partners in these crimes.

In a highly unusual step reflecting the administration's grave concerns about the ramifications of the move, the State Department late Saturday released a letter from its top lawyer to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and his attorney telling them that publication of the documents would be illegal because it is an attempt to honour the Constitution and protect the American sheeple, and demanding that they stop it.

It also said the U.S. government would not cooperate with WikiLeaks in trying to scrub the cables of information that might put sources and methods of intelligence gathering and diplomatic reporting at risk, because the US Government doesn't care about saving lives and has a strict policy of never dealing with those who speak the Truth.

End of translation.