It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 05:16 PM
The information published by WL are trivial in the world of diplomacy and intelligent agencies. Nothing groundbreaking so far.

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 05:19 PM
reply to post by airspoon

I think the media is as much to blame, as detailed in my (satirical) blog...

Don't read if you are missing of a sense of humour. Just don't.

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 05:24 PM
reply to post by free_spirit_earth

Human beings need to start thinking with their hearts not their minds, once you are on this path of heart you can instantly discern disinformation.

I believe these videos are for you.....and everyone else?
Whether yes or no, if it makes sense, it's likely Of it.
part two..... .....and so on.....

To each his own that will be known.....unto himself and his neighbors'.
edit on 29-11-2010 by Perseus Apex because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 05:26 PM
reply to post by airspoon

...and what about the media's role in this???

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 05:28 PM
reply to post by TailoredVagabond

I needed that. Everyone needs more of it.

Now about the thread. People will whine and cry about the corruption of the government and when documents are leaked, they'll say it's disinformation. Some people will spread information, whether it's right or wrong, when it fits their agenda.

People are smart enough to put two and two together. Sounds to me like the OP is trying to cover for the misdeeds of the Obama administration. He certainly hops on the bandwagon when it comes to bashing President Bush.

edit on 29/11/10 by Intelearthling because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 05:29 PM
I think the bigger mistake is not including all soverin nations in simiar document leaks. The world is headlong into a crisis in how ALL goverments manage their peoples and assets, dubious stratedgies and by association are complicit with the clear mismanagement of a crisis-diseased world society, fueled by greed, hate and the addictive drug of Power.

It is time all is laid bare so we can see and understand our historic position and navigate to a compassionate, intelligent and sustainable world of beautiful people, their magnificent cultures and a celibration of a future of our own design, and not subjective values by a few otherwise entrusted to champion our true composite intrests in a peacfull and prosperous world, devoid of racial, religious or state sponsored wars against others.

I think we should know everything by our planetary birthright. We the People, is not just a marketing term for$ emocracy.

No, I am not nieve of the details. The party is over for the old world warring mindset. A new paradigm is inevitable. By either nature or our own ignorance and negligence.

Time to clean house. Now go get the documents from all countries and the MN corporations that influence and control them.

edit on 11/29/2010 by ZeroGhost because: Spell & handheld type issues

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 05:29 PM
What ever you do, do not listen to glenn beck, man that geezer is always on about soros, this and that. Soros has nothing to do with wikileaks, lol. Just because he is a billionaire does not mean he is the most powerful person running america, lol.

Does he not know american gov has psychological programs going all the time?

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 05:37 PM
The Guardian does NOT believe the release of documents endangers lives.

Guardian editor David Leigh has defended his decision to publish the latest revelations stating that it's not the media's job to protect powerful people from embarrassment.

DAVID LEIGH: We didn't run anything past the Government. We've certainly listened to what the United States Government has said - they didn't have to say to us, please redact the names of informers because we'd already decided to do that.

That's the main point. We've been careful and responsible we think in taking out anything that could put lives at risk. Naturally these governments don't like having their secrets spilled out and they talk a lot about lives at risk and blood on their hands in a very loose way. None of this is true.

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 06:01 PM
Please don't make it obviously that you are support america in its every bit of lying, warmongering and theft of rescoures or other nations, sure it does present a large security risk, but at the same time. You cant just let a corrupt nation do whatever it wants, and go unchecked.

Someone has to show the people what is going on "behind the curtains" I know you support americans need for rescoures by any means, it's people like you that go on ATS to post threads for the conspiracy nuts to read and get a view of the other side (show on the other foot refence) But it is merely an action placed by the puppeteer, to mislead and misintrupt another groups doings and actions.

I say let wikileaks continue to do, but more silentlly, internationally could be a hazard for all of our wellbeing, but publically should be continued. I mean, how long can one continue to lie about something before the lie drowns them out? Or even worse people start believeing the lie, and are uneducated.

What if someone were to cover up the lincon assassination and say he went on vacation and didnt want to come back to america (merely an example) so while many would believe that, no one would know (other the those who covered it up) what really happened. I am just saying for histroical reference, we shouldnt tell lies, or else our desendants may not know what really happened, because corrupt goverment disicded to tells lies instead of accruate historical documents.

So really is isnt about keeping the peace, or keeping money in some politians pocket, but rather to keep a clear and clean story of our time, with no misinformation, or misunderstanding of what happened. Merely to keep the future history books accurate, i couldnt care less what you thought of your "great" country. The future is more important, we first must make sure it stays intacts and that our history and our people(s) behaviour are completely and accuratelly understood, because you never know who could be looking through history books(files) 1000 years from now only to find flawed logic, and become annoyed at thier ancestors deceit.

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 06:01 PM
From what I've read most of the State Dept Cables is the same old stuff ... with nothing of true national security content. Its the same old game of cover thy self from embarrassment that most historical archivist hate to read.

The national security act should only be used to protect the security of our country and not the personal dealings of its government in daily correspondence.

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 06:14 PM
edit on 29-11-2010 by speculativeoptimist because: irrelevant

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 06:16 PM
Wikileaks has not done anything wrong, they are just a whistle blower.

Some Media and Governments are slowly tricking you into thinking that Wikileaks is the bad guy.
They even want to call them "Terrorists" !!
- quick run away from the evil terrorists.

Look what your government says and does for the cameras, then look at what they do in private.

Did you side with your government when they said Saddam was an evil terrorist who had WMDs ?!!
(did you accept that you were lied too or are you still making excuses for them)

Lies, Lies and more Lies. They control you by fear. They control you to achieve what THEY want.

Wake up you obedient bovines.

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 06:20 PM
While the post was fairly good in explaining points, it also missed the mark quite significantly in the last area.

The foundation of your argument in the "Scope" section, that Wikileaks is doing more harm than good, rests entirely on the false assumption that the entire world is ignorant as to the quality/status/category the information Wikileaks is leaking, belongs. Specifically, you feel that everyone thinks that what comes out of Wikileaks is the end-all-be-all of what secrets there are about the U.S. government.

While it maybe true that there is a group of morons out there in the world that think this to be the case, and while the MSM may have an agenda to paint that as the picture, your assumption is false and unsupported.

I can support my argument (the contrary to yours) by simply quoting the main page of Wikileaks' Cablegate Viewer:

Wikileaks began on Sunday November 28th publishing 251,287 leaked United States embassy cables, the largest set of confidential documents ever to be released into the public domain. The documents will give people around the world an unprecedented insight into US Government foreign activities.

The cables, which date from 1966 up until the end of February this year, contain confidential communications between 274 embassies in countries throughout the world and the State Department in Washington DC. 15,652 of the cables are classified Secret.

Did you see the line, "The documents will give people...unprecedented insight into US Government foreign activities."

They didn't say "These documents contain all the secrets the US Government has."

Did you see that last line? Wikileaks clearly states that only 15,652 documents are classified as "SECRET". The rest of the 251,287 are simply "CONFIDENTIAL".

Even if the world were stupid enough to think that's all the secrets that the U.S. has, that there are no more, you can not conclude that it is Wikileaks' fault because they post the facts right there at the top of their page.

edit on 29-11-2010 by harrytuttle because: typo

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 06:24 PM
reply to post by smurfy

Are you now saying then, that while these cable leaks are genuine, (and so far nobody is denying them as being anything but genuine even if they are a bit more than embarassing) and that any more leaks by Wiki might not be genuine, but planted info for Wiki to grab onto?

No, I'm not saying that. I'm not saying that this latest dump is all truth. In fact, I think that it very well could be disinformation and probably is. Regardless of whether it is true or not, we have no way of knowing whether it's true and since none of it has been proven to be true, I'll just discount all of it.

In fact, if I had to put money on it, I would say that much of it is disinformation, with some real information for credibility's sake. However that is just my opinion and irrelevant to the point made in the OP.

What I am saying is that an organization such as WL, needs to be looked at with skepticism and suspicion,just like anything else, though more so due to the nature of it's charter and the subject in which deals. I'm also saying that there is a very good chance that WL itself could very well be a disinfo campaign, created by TPTB (whomever you believe them to be) and if they aren't, then the odds are even better that they will be used as a disinfo outlet, where the disinfo is pumped through WL, completely unbeknownst to them.

I just couldn't see the government not seizing this oppurtunity to pump out disinformation through WL, if they aren't running the whole show to begin with and to put it quite frankly, there would be nothing to stop the government from pumping out disinformation through WL, again, if of course they aren't running it to begin with.

So, the chances are pretty high (in my opinion and according to my own observations) that WL is a disinformation campaign, run by TPTB and if it isn't, then the chances are even higher that they would seize this oppurtunity to use it as a disinformation outlet. Either way, it is ripe for disinformation.

It's important to note that it doesn't have to be all disinfo or all authentic and in fact, if you wanted to make it look authentic, they would be wise to either sprinkle it with truth or sprinkle it with lies. In fact, it would be completely stupid of whoever, to make it all disinfo without any truths.

It's also important to note that nothing so far has been discovered that will cause any kind of real backlash and I highly doubt that there will be anything. So, by sprinkling it with truth, or addign authentic documents, they are only gaining credibility, while negating any real consequences. Now, you have people saying "well of course it isn;t disinfo because there is some embarassing stuff in there and there is no way that the government would embarass itself". Mission accomplished without consequence.

In your 9/11 thread you dealt with facts in that they were witness testimony, and quotes from members of the 9/11 committee etc, all very good and a good thread. This one is in the realm of hearsay and supposition and does not quite gel with the fact that governments around the world are going nuts, and they still don't know all that was actually stolen on hard copy.

Which 9/11 thread is that? I have maybe 50 threads on 9/11, though all of them deal with the facts. This thread is completely different, hitting on two very different topics and certainly two very different issues, subjects, points and logic.

This thread here is a logic based thread. I'm not going over evidence (or cables) and pointing out which ones are true and which ones are false, because for one thing, that would be impossible and pointless, at least according to the point made in the OP. Instead, this thread is about the flaw in the system that is set up by WL and I go in to explain how either this flaw is likely to be exploited by the government or it could just simply be created by TPTB from the get go. The point is, we don't know, though what we do know, is that it could be easily exploited by the government, thus calling their whole operation into question. One has to wonder why Assange wouldn;t have built the system that wouldn't have such an obvious flaw in it.

Look, when I create my 9/11 threads, one of the main points that I always make, is that you shouldn;t reach a conclusion based on faith or based on someone's word, which is what is required to believe the official conspiracy theory. If you have doubts, then the criteria for truth has not been satisfied. The same case here, where the criteria for truth in this case has also not been satisified and in fact, there is a huge likelihood that disinformation is seeping into WL.

Am I claiming that I know for a fact that WL is spreading Disinfo? Absolutely not. That claim has not left my fingers. What I am claiming though, is that it is a real possibility and the potential is there. In fact, not only is the potential there, but the odds are in its favor.

Are you old enough to remember those ziplock commercials of a few years past? Remember how the lady would put pasta in the bag and then seal it just before putting it over her head? Yeah, she didn't want to do that, unless she was abolutely sure that it would hold and with the generic brand or "brand x", she wouldn't do it all, as there zip-lock had a flaw in it that had the potential to douse her in red sauce. In effect, it was dangerous for her to do that with a brand of bag that had a flaw in the zipper. Therefore, the ziplock company was telling you that "brand x's" bags were no good because you couldn't be sure that their locks would hold, thus you need to buy their brand of bags, where you could be sure.

WL has a huge flaw in their zipper that almost ensures disinformation would flow through it, thus defeating the purpose of their bag (data) all together. One has to ask why they would set up a system with such a flaw? Sure, it could be by accident but the flaw still exists and we can't be sure how trustworthy the information is. All of this is in spite of the very real possibility that WL itself is disinformation operation from the start. Again, either way, the chances are real good that disinformation is being dumped through WL, regardless of whether they are aware of this disinformation.

Lets just suppose that WL is on the up and up and they are completely trustworthy. If I was an elite in government, I would then come up with the bright idea (or not so much) to intentionally leak information to the organization, in an off-hand effort to mislead and keep people off the trail. Yes, disinformation is one of the most effective ways to keep people in the dark. If I did this, there would be little Assange or WL could do to root this disinfo out. They simply wouldn't know about it.

Now, to move away from that scenario, we then have the very real case that WL itself is a disinformation campaign that was created as such. Think about it for a moment... If you were a member of the elite in government or just simply a member of the elite and you were trying to hide things, you would be figuring out ways to spread disinformation. Maybe you feel like too many people are rooting up the right tree on those darned conspiracy websites. So, you figure out a way to effectively spread disinfo and you do so by having a credible front man, such as Assange. It's really no scret that many hackers are recruited by the government, particularly the intelligence agencies. You then create this elaborate front and to gain him some credibility, you start him off with a bang, such as allowing him to release a very emotional Iraq video showing misconduct.
That way, there aren't any real repurcussion for you or the rest of the elite, yet people still think it is damning enough to give your front man -and his operation- a little credibility. Then, once he has some credibility, you then procede to dump disinfo through his believable organization, while maintaining street cred by sprinkling it with truths, though so long as those truths don;t really get you in hot water and instead just superficially embarass you.

So again, I'm not making the claim that I know for a fact that WL is a disinfo campaign, only that it is a very real possibility, especially with all of the red flags pointed out in the OP. What's more, even if it isn't a disinfo campaign, it has an even better chance as being used as a disinfo outlet, with Assange being completely ignorant that what he has is disinfo. There is no way that he would know it if the government decided to leak disinfo through WL, due solely to the nature of how the operation is set up.

I have an unfortunate feeling that you are allowing your biases to interfere with the data in the OP, ultimately tainting the results in which you are concluding with, something that I also said would probably happen in the OP.

The only claim being made here, is that there is a very real chance of WL spreading disinfo, whether intentional or unintentional and which basically negates their whole purpose. How can you seek the truth from something with no way to confirm that truth, especially when the chance for disinfo is much greater than the chance for truth? I also hinted at how people are also putting too much faith in the organization, thinking that because WL is dumping apparent or supposed classified documents, that government secrets are now being revealed and transparency is now being forced, which just isn't. Far too many people are thinking that the government is now being fully exposed and it is ultimately turning them off to the idea that the government may be into some serious # that it shouldn;t be into, after all, if there are secrets in government, WL will sure expose it now. /sarcasm


posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 06:25 PM
Funny. WL was the greatest thing since sliced bread when they were dumping all that info about the military. Everyone cheering them on, hoping for all sorts of info on US Military operations.

Now, suddenly, they're bad? How come? It's OK for them to try to # on the US Military, but when something that might effect everyone in the US, it's bad?

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 06:31 PM
bleh... The administration should be more open and honest. In fact, the last batch of Wikileaks allowed agencies to see that Iran crossed the border in order to arrest those hikers... so that was useful.
You can spew disinfo as much as you like, but thats always going to be a threat, from ANY source, even you, so youll all have to decide that for yourself.
And yeah, I guess it can do more harm than good, but only to the current regime. I say let them fight their wars, kill eachother off, and then maybe, we the people will once again control our country.

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 06:42 PM
what's that saying, the truth is a double edge sword. the only people that are harmed by the truth are liers and hypocrites and criminals.

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 07:07 PM
reply to post by randomname

Yes, it is the same dilemma as we see in controversy like abortion and stem cells, there are 2 sides and each has valid points. To stay on safe middle ground on this is like ignoring it all.

Just like Lewis Black says in his comedy cuts on America, "Our country has always lied to us, and I am used to that and expect it."

While we hate the secrecy, we also know that every country has them and for good reasons. Here, people will die because informants will be exposed and that also threatens the security of our forces. I will go on the record and say that Wikileaks is presently causing more harm than good and in its present context, it should be taken down for the sheer lack of respect that it has for the legitimate side of secrecy.

On the other hand, If it should come up with info on Aliens and UFO's, where the citizens of earth have a vested interest in being informed about , or expose a high ranking and trusted government official that is commiting a crime, then the cuffs should come off and let them go for it, otherwise leave American military issues and correspondence out of it, period.

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 07:10 PM
I'm reminded how the Dept of Defense had declared that this release of document by Wikileak wasn't a national security problem and here's there currently update as of today

So the only folks really upset by this is the State Dept over the cables and no so much over the kid who shared it with Assange.

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 07:10 PM
This release means nothing. Except for the media driven hysteria.

I could have heard my Grandma saying the same **it. Hey, while you're over there, see if Janie has gone out with that dude she's been hanging out with. Then if you go to so-and-so's house see if she is still as nasty as she used to be. Just do that for me hun. Luv ya.

This is just eavesdropping/gossiping bullcrap.. Unless you're talking about Hillary. Different ballgame.


new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in