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.

 

Wikileaks Exposed - The man behind the NWO Curtain

page: 56
203
<< 53  54  55    57  58  59 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a Wolf Blitzer video on the wikileaks saga



even Vladimir Putin thinks there is
a conspiracy here along with the
Turkish President who both say it
in interviews.




posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


Your right boon, no way anyone in the
correct frame of mind could think otherwise.

Clearly wiki leaks has a hidden agenda
with Assange being the shill.
That video snippet is very informative,
does not take a genius to understand this, just put two and two together.
Grow a brain people, wiki leaks is
playing you for fools, while using you like tools.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by jaynkeel

Could you enlighten us on all of these lies that Beck commits?


Gladly


1) He is AGAINST net neutrality and pretends the government would take over the Internet if we'd get net neutrality. In reality, if we don't have net neutrality, corporations get 100% control of the internet and can bully anyone they don't like. Obviously beck likes that given that he's all about the money (gold scandal made it clear).

2) Goldline: I've worked in real estate investments for years, but never have I heard anyone trying to sell someone an investment that only breaks even if the price increases by 65% (!!!)...all the while stating that it's a great investment.

3) 10% of Muslims are terrorists: That would mean over 150mil people are Muslim terrorists...that's more than France and Germany combined and anyone who can count sees how ridiculous this figure is. Yet he continues to repeat it.

4) Sharia coming to the US: The mere thought is laughable as US laws prevent Sharia law from ever overruling US law. Saying Sharia's coming to the US is nothing but fear mongering and paranoia by delusional Beck.

5) "No president was ever sworn in without a bible": Blatant lie, Adams didn't use one, and neither did a few others...not that it matters, but it just shows how blatantly he's lying when trying to push his televangelist agenda.

6) Carbon dioxide isn't poisonous according to Beck and we shouldn't worry about it at all. I guess he never put a a plastic bag on his head...he should though.

7) Obama is a racist according to Beck...which is hilarious given that we don't have a single racist quote from Obama. But I guess it fits his agenda and must be true, right?
So much you can criticize Obama for, and he goes with this laughable attempt...

8) Blatantly lied about the numbers attending his rally...independent satellite photos made that pretty clear. But I guess he was stroking his own ego or trying to give himself more credibility.

9) "Wilmington (Ohio) hasn’t taken any money from the government. They don’t want any money from the government."



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Seems LSE are the ones churning out hate mongering disinformation agents.

Where one gets taught *how to be a morononon* 101
edit on 23-12-2010 by thecinic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by thecinic
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Seems LSE are the ones churning out hate mongering disinformation agents.

Where one gets taught *how to be a morononon* 101
edit on 23-12-2010 by thecinic because: (no reason given)


Awesome comeback mate, I especially love how your prove your points with facts instead of resorting to ad hominem attacks...oh...wait


Until you have something constructive to say, with some real researched content, you might wanna shut up as it makes you look very silly


Oh, and FYI, Kennedy went to LSE too...and Paul Krugman, as well as a TON of very influential people who did a lot of good. FULL LIST
edit on 23-12-2010 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 

Wait wait! So... Glenn Beck was right?
I always thought of Soros as a distraction, or a fake shadow behind the throne. Though I suppose he's up there with Rockefeller with his socio-political-economic dynasty. More research is needed.

Star and Flag




posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by kallisti36
reply to post by boondock-saint
 

Wait wait! So... Glenn Beck was right?
I always thought of Soros as a distraction, or a fake shadow behind the throne. Though I suppose he's up there with Rockefeller with his socio-political-economic dynasty. More research is needed.




Yes, more research is clearly required from you as you so obviously buy Beck's lies without checking the facts yourself



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   
This thread has clearly reached the stage that REGARDLESS of what Wikileaks or Julian Assange do,
it will all fit in with the plan...

I challenge the OP to tell me what wikileaks needs to do to prove you wrong...

It seems you have spun the thread in a way that anything they say or do is wrong or simply a distraction..



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
this is the kind of stuff that really bothers me,
when you can't tell friend from foe. In this video,
Ron Paul calls wikileaks heroes.



now, with that being said, I began research
to find a relationship between Soros and Paul.

While I did not find a direct contribution in monetary
funding, I did however find Soros croonies working
in conjunction with Paul for certain agendas.


The involvement of two officials of the libertarian Cato Institute confirms our fears about the influence of what we called the “Progressive Libertarians.” These libertarians, sometimes mistakenly referred to as conservatives, have often collaborated with left-wing organizations and individuals, especially on cuts to national defense and on the liberal social agenda.

We noted, “The seeds of this strange collaboration of interests were planted decades ago, when the pro-Marxist Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) held a seminar under the title of ‘Left and Right,’ featuring Marcus Raskin of IPS and Karl Hess, then an IPS fellow. The speakers at this 1969 event included economist Murray Rothbard and Jeff Liebling, the latter identified as ‘former Youth for Goldwater’ and ‘SDS member.’ Hess, a former Barry Goldwater speechwriter who died in 1994, traveled easily between left and right.”


www.canadafreepress.com...

and how the above quote relates to Ron Paul.
more from the link above


Playing a critical role in the effort is Rep. Ron Paul, who is generally considered by his followers to be an opponent of Obama’s liberal agenda. Rep. Paul has called for a U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan and has joined with the far-left in Congress to urge reductions in funding for the war effort there. He calls the U.S. military effort to defeat Al Qaeda and the Taliban an “occupation” of the country and “an ill-advised quagmire with no end in sight.” He says the effort is too expensive and won’t be successful. “It is time to leave Afghanistan to the Afghans to sort out,” he says.

President Obama has already appointed a National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform to look at long-term budgetary trends and vote on a final report no later than December 1. The proposals are likely to include massive tax increases, some minor spending cuts in domestic spending programs, and major reductions to the U.S. national defense budget.

The plan is being presented by the media as a bipartisan effort to make “substantial cuts” to the national defense budget.

Under the “Sustainable Defense Task Force” plan advanced by the so-called “odd couple” of Reps. Ron Paul (R-Tx.) and Barney Frank (D-Ma.), the U.S. Navy would be cut to 230 combat ships (from a planned number of 313). Under President Reagan, the U.S. had come close to achieving a 600-ship Navy.

Rep. Frank, one of the most left-wing members of Congress, created the “Sustainable Defense Task Force” that came up with the cuts and worked in cooperation with Reps. Paul, Walter Jones (R-N.C.), and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). Their plan is designed to serve as a model for Obama’s proposed cuts.

The “left-right coalition” making up the membership of the group included people from the Center for American Progress and the Cato Institute, both of them funded by George Soros. Another member came from the pro-Marxist Institute for Policy Studies.


So as you can see here that Ron Paul is working
along side Soros on certain agendas. Paul is
working with members of CAP and the Cato Institute.
Both of those orgs are funded by Soros. And Barney Frank
is a Soros stooge.

And then Ron Paul comes out and praises wikileaks.
It's one thing to praise free speech and truth, but
to endorse the organization associated with
Soros is political suicide in the next election.
Bad move Dr. Paul. Hidden agendas are coming
to light.

Also another note:
Ron Paul wants to end the FED.
So does Soros.

However, the difference between the 2 is that
Paul wants the US Treasury to take it's place.
But Soros wants that task to be assigned
to a new world order international bank
owned by the rothschilds.

So I forsee Soros using Dr. Paul to help
end the FED, then a hostile takeover by
Soros to enforce globalism in the
financial sector.

Using your enemy to work for you
til the hard part is done, then tossing
them to the side. As long as Paul helps
Soros in that endeavor then Paul is in
no danger from Soros.

Ironically enough, Paul was just elected
to oversee the FED. How convenient for
Soros ???

edit on 12/23/2010 by boondock-saint because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 



And then Ron Paul comes out and praises wikileaks.
It's one thing to praise free speech and truth, but
to endorse the organization associated with
Soros is political suicide in the next election.
Bad move Dr. Paul. Hidden agendas are coming
to light.


I think you will lose a lot of allies by dragging Ron Paul into your fantasy...
He has done nothing but support the people and the constitution..



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   
I think all leaders should come out for transparency in government. As far as the Wikileaks data, it has been picked through and all the good stuff is gone. Yeah, sombody has an agenda and it is not the one we thought it was.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
I think you will lose a lot of allies by dragging Ron Paul into your fantasy...
He has done nothing but support the people and the constitution..

dude, it's no fantasy.
it's evidence in black and white.
The only side I am on

is for the truth !!!!

wherever the cookie crumbles
and no matter whose toes
it steps on.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by backinblack
I think you will lose a lot of allies by dragging Ron Paul into your fantasy...
He has done nothing but support the people and the constitution..

dude, it's no fantasy.
it's evidence in black and white.
The only side I am on

is for the truth !!!!

wherever the cookie crumbles
and no matter whose toes
it steps on.


Then answer my earlier post about what Wiki could do to change your mind..
Or is your mind set on them being guilty and NOTHING will change that?



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
Then answer my earlier post about what Wiki could do to change your mind..
Or is your mind set on them being guilty and NOTHING will change that?

the only thing that will change my mind
is for wikileaks to prove by documentation
that Soros or any org funded by him OR a clandestine
agency is NOT funding wikileaks. And a sworn affidavit from
Assange that he is not involved with or controlled
by Soros or any clandestine organized government
entity or that he or wikileaks is not being supported
by Soros agenda driven supporters.

Show me this and we'll talk,
other than that it's a dead end.

And I don't mean Assange just saying it
in an interview, I mean real proof by documentation.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 



the only thing that will change my mind
is for wikileaks to prove by documentation
that Soros or any org funded by him OR a clandestine
agency is NOT funding wikileaks. And a sworn affidavit from
Assange that he is not involved with or controlled
by Soros or any clandestine organized government
entity or that he or wikileaks is not being supported
by Soros agenda driven supporters.

Show me this and we'll talk,
other than that it's a dead end.

And I don't mean Assange just saying it
in an interview, I mean real proof by documentation.


Real documentation to prove a negative.??
Not sure how that works..
Soros may have donated money to wiki..Millions of people have.
That in no way means that millions of donators or one have control of wiki..

BTW, I could go back and find your post where you clearly stated you would NOT believe Wiki or Assange if they said they were not involved with Soros...

So I guess I'm right..
Your mind is set and NOTHING will change that..



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
Real documentation to prove a negative.??
Not sure how that works..
Soros may have donated money to wiki..Millions of people have.
That in no way means that millions of donators or one have control of wiki..

BTW, I could go back and find your post where you clearly stated you would NOT believe Wiki or Assange if they said they were not involved with Soros...

So I guess I'm right..
Your mind is set and NOTHING will change that..

couple points I want to make here:

1) How do you know Millions have donated to wikileaks?
Are you on the inside and have privy info? or where is ur source
for that statement?

And it's not real proof to prove a negative.
it's just proof to show no relationship exist
between 2 entities. This cannot be proved
by wikileaks or assange as I have already
proved numerous times in this thread that
the relationship between the 2 exist on
multiple levels (funding, resources, support
infrastructure, personnel, agenda, etc...)

edit on 12/23/2010 by boondock-saint because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 



1) How do you know Millions have donated to wikileaks?
Are you on the inside and have privy info? or where is ur source
for that statement?

And it's not real proof to prove a negative.
it's just proof to show no relationship exist
between 2 entities. This cannot be proved
by wikileaks or assange as I have already
proved numerous times in this thread that
the relationship between the 2 exist on
multiple levels (funding, resources, support
infrastructure, personnel, etc...)


Ahh Boon..One German Bank states they have processed thousands of donations..
Care to list ALL of Soro's associations and then we will see that it's probably HARDER not to cross paths at some stage rather than the opposite...

We could say Wiki is involved with Israel (which you have done) simply because the majority of MSM is owned by them..

But like I said and it's more obvious by your posts, you will NEVER change your mind..



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
But like I said and it's more obvious by your posts, you will NEVER change your mind..

why are you so worried about what I think ???
why does it drive you to come back day
after day and post in this thread ???

edit on 12/23/2010 by boondock-saint because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by backinblack
But like I said and it's more obvious by your posts, you will NEVER change your mind..

why are so worried about what I think ???
why does it drive you to come back day
after day and post in this thread ???


As you state, truth...
Readers of your thread need to see the opposing view.
Not just your view which suffers from tunnel vision...

And the truth is you are right..
It is just what you THINK, with no concrete proof..
Just a bunch of information you have twisted to suit your agenda..



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
As you state, truth...
Readers of your thread need to see the opposing view.
Not just your view which suffers from tunnel vision...

And the truth is you are right..
It is just what you THINK, with no concrete proof..
Just a bunch of information you have twisted to suit your agenda..

twisted???
lmao

I have put forth my evidence in a most revealing and
straight forward manner in post after post after post.
Yet you have yet to give any evidence whatsoever
to back your stance. I'd say ur the one with the
agenda here.

hint hint:
u will NOT win this argument
til you produce evidence showing
me to be wrong, which you have
not done once in this entire thread.



new topics

top topics



 
203
<< 53  54  55    57  58  59 >>

log in

join