It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Danger of WikiLeaks: Why the organization could be doing more harm than good

page: 4
123
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Are you saying that they shouldn't have leaked this part which proves Hillary gave illegal orders? This is exactly the reason why such leaks should be made.

You are comparing your country's laws with the United States. When it comes to how the United States deals with other nations, the intelligence agencies dig into foreign diplomat backgrounds as common practice. It is legal in our country. It is also a very supported practice.

We do not answer to a global government. How things are done in Finland (or in the United Nations) do not reflect the United States laws and practices.


edit on 29-11-2010 by Section31 because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Section31
 


Not that I don't agree with you, but it is illegal here in this country to spy through the UN. In fact, we are a signator to many treaties in which we agree not to use the UN or go through the UN for various intelligence collecting or "spy" operations. Depending on the exact words in this cable or the method of collecting this data, it could very well be illegal and probably is.


--airspoon
edit on 29-11-2010 by airspoon because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Section31
 


Actually:



The UN has previously asserted that bugging the secretary general is illegal, citing the 1946 UN convention on privileges and immunities which states: "The premises of the United Nations shall be inviolable. The property and assets of the United Nations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation and any other form of interference, whether by executive, administrative, judicial or legislative action".


Source
edit on 29/11/2010 by PsykoOps because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by Section31
 


Not that I don't agree with you, but it is illegal here in this country to spy through the UN. In fact, we are a signator to many treaties in which we agree not to use the UN or go through the UN for various intelligence collecting or "spy" operations. Depending on the exact words in this cable or the method of collecting this data, it could very well be illegal and probably is.

Is it one of those things where we publicly acknowledge certain practices, but behind closed doors we quietly carry them out as policy? Similar to the wiretapping? We have been wiretapping our own citizens since the cold war. Since the events of 9/11 were significant, the intelligence community and president were only trying to streamline the practice. When the law lost in the public arena, the intelligence community quietly accepted defeat but is still wiretapping the public.

Personally, I am all for spying on our foreign counterparts.

edit on 29-11-2010 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   
This and wiretapping own citizens. Do you honestly think it would be better to keep it as a secret policy? I know there is some dangerous information on specifics of operations etc. that could be dangerous but exposing such a 'policy' is good. The only way to end such 'policy' and fix things is to expose them. I have 0 trust that governments would ever change if they weren't forced by their citizens.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   
This other Guardian page will explain how the SIPDIS system became vunerable and failed possibly in Iraq. It should be noted that SIPDIS appears to use items classified as secret. There are other systems for "more sensitive" material...I suppose it all depends on how sensitive things are seen as


www.guardian.co.uk...

I find this thread uncomfortable in regard to Wikileaks, Not so long ago it was "the hero of the revolution" Now it seems with this thread, Wikileaks "is damned if they do and damned if they don't" a kind of cake and eat it result for this thread don't you think! poor old Wiki, all that disinfo/genuine work for nothing, and what a waste of time that Iraq video was. Ah well, a new world in the morning!



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
This and wiretapping own citizens. Do you honestly think it would be better to keep it as a secret policy?

Yes I do. Here is why...

Article: How China Steals U.S. Military Secrets
If we do not perform wiretapping in secret, we would not be able to catch spies in our country. Since many of them become United States citizens (similar to the recent Russian spies), we need to keep our eyes and ears open for potential dangers. Both foreign and domestic.

edit on 29-11-2010 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


no stars no flags... the truth might hurt but truth is way which leads to real happiness. why people like you are interested in living in illusions?

I MUST SAY AMERICAN GOVT. OR ANY OTHER GOVT. HAVE NOT YET DENIED THE RELIABILITY OF WIKI LEAKS,, YES THEY ARGUING THAT IT IS AGAINS THEIR INTEREST BUT THAT DOES NOT SHOW THAT ITS LIE. AND IF IT IS TRUTH THAT WORLD SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THE POLICIES OF ELITES OF CFR AND FREEMASONARY




posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Section31
 


Oh sorry I thought you meant blanket wiretapping or 'fishing' for spies by accessing private information without warrants etc. Of course there is legal and justified counter spying against suspects and hostile operatives.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
reply to post by Section31
 


Actually:



The UN has previously asserted that bugging the secretary general is illegal, citing the 1946 UN convention on privileges and immunities which states: "The premises of the United Nations shall be inviolable. The property and assets of the United Nations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation and any other form of interference, whether by executive, administrative, judicial or legislative action".

Agreed Psy,
The trouble is the UN is both ignored and used when it suits.


Source
edit on 29/11/2010 by PsykoOps because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Section31
 


enemies don't have to trained secret agents to spy on us anymore Wikileak is serving on a silver plate everything they need...



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   
That's quite a claim. Could you provide a link to go with that?



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Section31

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Are you saying that they shouldn't have leaked this part which proves Hillary gave illegal orders? This is exactly the reason why such leaks should be made.

You are comparing your country's laws with the United States. When it comes to how the United States deals with other nations, the intelligence agencies dig into foreign diplomat backgrounds as common practice. It is legal in our country. It is also a very supported practice.

We do not answer to a global government. How things are done in Finland (or in the United Nations) do not reflect the United States laws and practices.


edit on 29-11-2010 by Section31 because: (no reason given)


Exactly why everybody is laughing at the US now. It's like somebody found the diary of the biggest bully in a school.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by mustfarhan
 


You too are missing the point. In fact, you are so far off the point, I don't know where to begin, other than to say that you should reread the OP.

This isn't really about the idea of exposing the truth, so much as whether it is the truth at all. How do you know that Wikileaks is honest in their quest to expose the truth? Because they told you so? Even if they are telling the truth, it certainly doesn't mean that their source is. In fact, it should just be automatically assumed that the government would purposefully leak disinformation or misinformation, if WL itself isn't their operation to begin with.

As far as some secrets needing to remain secrets, that certainly is the case, though with very limited aspects of government operation. Are you trying to suggest that the locations of nuclear platforms or defense strategies should be made public? How about military maneuvers, giving the time, place, strength and goal? Would this not defeat the whole purpose of defense posturing? Why not then just get rid of the military all together? Do you really think that our freedom would last for more than 24 hours if our military just dissolved over night?

Lets look at this very real hypothetical scenario for instance:

The quantities, capabilities and specifications of nuclear submarines should be kept secret, otherwise potential enemies can use that information to defeat the purposes and effectiveness of these submarines. If they know for instance the diving depths of these submarines, then any enemy can simply adjust their depth charges to counter them or set up sub nets to that particular depth. They can also use electronics to interfere with the depth gage so that the sub implodes, considering that the frequencies of the electronics would be made public too. What about the locations of these subs, should that be made public too? We then lose our strategic edge for being able to respond to a nuclear threat.

The sad fact of the matter is that the world isn't all roses and regardless of whether our military is taken advantage of for nefarious purposes, it is still an absolute necessity to maintain that military, lest we quickly learn how to read and right Chinese or Korean.

Though with that being said, the danger of classified information such as that listed above, is only a small portion of the over-all damage that WL presents, as mentioned in the OP. Just the fact that WL is so easily compromised for disinformation, makes the organization extremely dangerous, at least for those seeking the truth, especially when many people buy into the idea that WL is providing transparency.

Lets just suppose that WL is sincere in their mission statement and by some unknown and odd reason the government decides to refrain from leaking disinfo to WL. WL still doesn't even scratch the surface of making the government transparent. Instead, they would only get the very top layer or the semi secret and relatively mundane information. So, instead of the people focussing on the damaging secrets that the government holds, they will be far too busy focussing on the mundane and relatively unimportant information (that may not even be true, with no way of authenticating) that is leaked through wikileaks, all the while believing that this is the full scope of secrecy.

Again, reread the OP.



--airspoon



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Baldur
 


Exactly why did this happen then? Did it happen because of wikileaks or did it happen because US had stupid 'policies'? Think twice before you answer

edit on 29/11/2010 by PsykoOps because: added reply to:



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Investigateconspiracies
reply to post by Section31
 


enemies don't have to trained secret agents to spy on us anymore Wikileak is serving on a silver plate everything they need...

You're forgetting that is not just the US that's involved, a lot of countries are implicated. The embarassment for the US however is twofold, first because their system failed and secondly their own activities under the "whatever it takes ideology" have been revealed.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   
I have not read the OPs argument but it seems to disagree with WL and I strongly feel WL is a good for humanity. Forget Nations and Religions, lets talk about Humanity. For so long humanity has been kept in the dark to what their leaders do in their, humanity's,own names; it seems with less transparency the bigger government gets. Well WL has provided many answers to our questions and has lessened the general anxiety in many aware persons. Without WL we would be on ATS not totally sure of what is the thought process of our leaders.

Thank God now the ppl can know what they have allowed to transpire and can one day fully wake up and realize it is HIGH TIME for change. WL is a tool for the ppl or an example for Illuminati once Assange and co. are found. Let us hope the first scenario happens. I will read the OPs opinion now that I have said my piece so I myself, can reread this and see how my opinion differs or is strengthened.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   
This is NOT internal war between CIA & Pentagon…

Actually these classified documents started to steal by MOSAD long time back, so the reason of disclosure by WikiLeaks is to create Mega conflict between governments.

(Sounds like HOT GUN or False flag ! )
edit on 29-11-2010 by Prof. Twister because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 01:36 PM
link   
My impression of this latest leak is that I mostly support it, however...

I feel like Wikileaks is targeting America a bit heavily and leaving other important nations untouched. My point of view is, go big or go home, you can't bring America down and leave all the other assholes standing. It's time to step up his game if he seeks to be fair/honorable, and start targeting countries like Russia, China, the UK, and just about any other nation for intelligence leaks. Now... this would likely compound any dangers for Assange and other members of Wikileaks, however, somebody's gotta start doing it. This could be a global revolution of transparency which could disintegrate oppressive power structures, and solely targeting America may be counter-productive to a certain degree if we don't spread the love of leaks.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
What do veterans have to say.....

It appears they have alot to say though more to Do.
This is not a matter of revealing 'state secrets', espionage (yes, though not as one would suppose), or high treason as one may assume but Rather wikileaks is a disinformation/misinformation outlet to misdirect the attentions of those who wish to discover the truth of it all.

These are serious acts of high treason and espionage that must be put down asap for obvious reasons.
These fellers (in the ^link^ above and below) are on the run for a reason and wish to cover their tracks or mislead the folks off 'the' track.
False flag attack? Thank you sir, may I have another?

I believe it helps to look at wikileaks from the perspective of the NWO folks.
They would like nothing more than to create a legal precedent for going after or putting an official End to 'any' kind of leak that may surface in the future that could sabotage the NWO plan for 'you'. Internet censorship of freedom of speech is the other 'obvious' motive, among others.

Remember, they 'create' a problem so the public may 'react' to that problem in order to get the public to seek the solution to the problem the authors/planners created in the first place.

The Hegelian Dialectic of Problem, Reaction, Solution.....Problem, Reaction, Solution.....Problem, Reaction, Solution.....

It is past time to Act as a/thE creator would expect of one.
If one has intellect, they are expected to use it.
If one has a conscience, by design, they are expected to Use it.

Great effort Airspoon.
It counts.
Uknow.
edit on 29-11-2010 by Perseus Apex because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
123
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join