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 Is Not A CIA Psy-Ops

page: 4
57
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by tristar
[

I don't understand your question. There is info on Israel in the cables if you go and read it. Screenshot of what?


Well how about, troop deployment, recent imports via the suez canal and its recent delivery of primers. Ooops..i forgot this is ats and not wiki.



Sorry, but I don't understand a word of what you are talking about. Like I said, I didn't understand your question - and this post hasn't clarified that... I see no ball!
edit on 6-12-2010 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



edit on 6-12-2010 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)


What i was trying to point out is the fact that one of the most grayest areas of global politics and not only, points to the M.E. Given that it is to be the next hot spot and not in the way we have seen recent events unfold, it is questionable to note that very few documents referring to its status or its leaders are not present, We have all read how the u.s. see's other global leaders, but we have not read how the u.s. see the current status and its deployment along with the less than accepted use of munitions on civilian populations. I would have thought that such documents would have been the first to be filtered through given how many people are aware of the Israeli lobby within the U.S..

Deductive reasoning.




posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 02:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by romanmel
The OP seems convinced that WL is pure as the fallen snow in it's motivation.


That is not entirely accurate.

Personal motivations are difficult to ascertain...they can be assumed but I am the last person to state that there is an absolute behavioral interpretation...



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 03:00 AM
link   
I believe Lord Monckton has re-earned the title though more importantly chooses not abuse the authority of it all.


Good for him.
Good for you.

Thinking cap On track.....
Those Big Eyes, traits as expected.
Reminds me of mipapaw.

Now there are those whom propose to look to the stars for the answers they seek.
Unfortunately, the recent 'stargazers' of 'recent' are frauds.
They simply speak as they will for their benefit and your destruction.
When one speaks the truth it Does ring as clear as a bell, as it should, by design.....an intelligent One.

The conscience assures this though once again, a man can be led to the water hole but.....bla.....bla.

edit on 49am32033112331201012 by Perseus Apex because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
reply to post by tristar
 

Hello tristar.

Interesting and while I can agree that there are some similarities there is a very distinct difference in the recent years with Vietnam. Remember, information was propagated on a stagnant level, as in there was almost no choice for the majority to accept the presented information. The internet has changed that. I repeat that all over ATS but only because I think that it is worthy of note since we now can view information exchange on an instantaneous level.


I agree with you here, but we should point out on a personal level, that the then Vietnam coverage was very much censored. However, due to the open approach to drum up home spirit many articles and news releases exiting country were first exported into the now european zone and then trickled its way into the U.S. main stream media. As many of us here have at some point seen many news reels both home and abroad showing the impact of the war upon the u.s. citizens. This obviously created an open voice against U.S. intervention into foreign nations not due to ideological values, but due to a financial crisis that was right around the corner.
www.historycentral.com...

A similar effect was also present and was very high on the agenda as to strict media control as lessons were learn't as to the affects of war upon u.s. citizens and its economy.
www.marketwatch.com...


What does this do?

For one, it takes away some of the authority and as well opens up nationalities.

This isn't a strictly nationalistic international paradigm but one that uses nationalism for corporate/economic gain. As well, the internal politics of any given nation is indeed worthy of a look see since we have officials elected or appointed based on corporate affiliation or even theistic mores and values...in some cases it is a manipulation of basic ideaology that opens the door for many of our elected officials.

I can still appreciate the Vietnam reference and any analysis of global trend would be remiss to not look into the economy that a war can effect but I am perhaps thinking it is time to look beyond national boundaries and find that money and power seekers ignore such boundaries...and perhaps even at times effect international opinion and stability for such purposes.


I guess we both agree on what should be and what should not be, the free flow of information that can be allowed to be viewed by its citizens is at times and for the benefit of its citizens kept well away from public view. So i guess its a fine line as to what should be allowed and what should not be allowed. It simply boils down to, what ones intentions are when engaging the theory of public scrutiny. For example, i could possibly post a code on how to clone 2008+ smart phones. To some, such information is considered and the person publishing such code would be branded as a "hacker", but, i could also claim that my leaked information is to make the public aware of how easy one can access another phone with the simple use of a causal sms.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 03:37 AM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


An Uncle was head of operations in Vietnam.
He could tell you the Generals were Not in charge.
The politicians ran the war.

If it was up to the Generals/CSMs, I could guarantee you that war would have ended quickly though the war was a mistake to begin with. A mistake of intelligence; a mistake to some, an agenda for another. This is not a question but.....a fact of history not found in the history books but rather, 'history'.

As we write, may we always remember the maxim "Moderation in all things".
It helps.....though folks will do as they know or know not.
edit on 49am54050112531201012 by Perseus Apex because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Perseus Apex
reply to post by tristar
 


An Uncle was head of operations in Vietnam.
He could tell you the Generals were Not in charge.
The politicians ran the war.

If it was up to the Generals/CSMs, I could guarantee you that war would have ended quickly though the war was a mistake to begin with. A mistake of intelligence, a mistake to some, an agenda for another. This is not a question but rather, a fact of history not found in the history books but rather, 'history'.

As we write, may we always remember the maxim "Moderation in all things".
It helps though folks will do as they know or know not.
edit on 49am49033912331201012 by Perseus Apex because: (no reason given)


Oh i do agree with you on the point that the politicians were in charge resulting a complete waste of human life to say the least, but as you pointed out, intelligence gathering methods used were not what they could have been, i guess the same can be said on how the public was openly lied to when the term "WMD" was first implanted into all media services regardless of language and nation. I guess it goes to show that some information can be and should be released at all costs and some information is simply way to hot for the public to handle as it WILL cause mass confusion resulting in a disruptions on all fronts.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock

Originally posted by romanmel
The OP seems convinced that WL is pure as the fallen snow in it's motivation.


That is not entirely accurate.

Personal motivations are difficult to ascertain...they can be assumed but I am the last person to state that there is an absolute behavioral interpretation...


Oh?

"WikiLeaks Is Not A CIA Psy-Ops,"

Sounds like an absolute declaration to me.

Do you have irrefutable evidence from CIA sources to make such a statement, or are you extrapolating that determination based on what you perceive to be honorable motivations of WL?



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 03:54 AM
link   
reply to post by romanmel
 


RomanMel
Got it.
not lol.

Rahm Emanuel has been following a lost cause based on foolish 'assumptions' about their history as well as their 'authority'. Yes, I understand that Mel Gibson was set up by Rahm and company for his role playing and feature films of which went against 'their' grain of lies. Mel Gibson is a good man caught up in a vindictive industry. This is truth though those that know.....know what I say. Change course Rahm (not Ram) or move course. The evidence is all over your 'place'. You know you have it coming. It's merely a waiting game but you know this and I know you will read this. Do the Right Thing Rahm. It would help to use the same imagination that got you caught up in all the BS. You know what I say. Just Do The Right Thing. Unfortunately, you know what that is but it doesn't have to be unfortunate. "Why fear the flesh when the soul is eternal"?

"Bueller"..... or.....
From what "I" understand, Americans are not subjects by nature.
The msm was the freak of nature.
The result; obvious.
edit on 49am37051312531201012 by Perseus Apex because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 04:13 AM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


Yep.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 04:54 AM
link   
Let's see what happens, now that he got arrested.

Second



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 05:06 AM
link   
reply to post by romanmel
 


The evidence will come out when the people 'deserve' it.
Most Are subjects, though not by design.
Hence, msm.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 05:38 AM
link   
reply to post by romanmel
 


You are imposing a false dichotomy upon the OP. It is logically possible both of the following propositions are true:

1. WikiLeaks is not a psy-op
2. The motives which drive the operation are not completely altruistic.

Re-read MemoryShock's reply to you and you might see that he has adopted an agnostic view about the intentions of WikiLeaks as an organization, even though he rejects the hypothesis that WL is a psy-op.

If we cannot think clearly, then we cannot expect to ever separate truth from lie or friend from foe.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by PriamsPride
 


Sounds 'confusing' by nature.
Truth should Not be confused.
It Is.....



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 05:54 AM
link   
The title of this thread is definitely problematic, as is usually the case when absolutes are glibly tossed around and wholly unsupported.

Personally, I am still waiting for something, in fact - ANYTHING important slash damaging slash interesting slash true to be revealed. So far all I see is a bunch of lies and rumors, and feeble ones at that. If this is the 'confidential information' that so terrorizes the US governement then obviously I must be missing something.

Firstly, you will forgive me for being extremely skeptical about an individual who, whilst dodging the FBI, the CIA and the NSA still finds ample time to concede interviews left right and center. TV, magazines, Vanity Fair - you name it.

Anyone with any common sense knows, or should, that the day you have damaging information that really jeopardizes national security and you decide to run from the aforementioned thugs, then the odds of surviving the first 24 hours might be estimated at 5% and those odds decrease extremely rapidly thereafter.

What I am trying to say here is that if the 'information' to be released were really damaging to national security then you wouldn't hear about the information or about the individual involved, for a very simple reason: the individual would be dead, a bullet to the head and one to the heart.

But, you might object, in the event that happened then a ... what was it again - ah yes- 'a poisoned pill' of information would be revealed to the world at large.

Well, in that regard, how damaging is the information so far? The answer is, it's not. It's neither damaging nor is it credible for that matter. What does it prove, any of it? Nothing.

According to the data released so far, Iraq did have weapons of mass destruction, Bin Laden is still dangerous and on the run, Iran is seeking to destabilize the region and seeking weapons of mass destruction, Pakistan is supporting the Taliban and so on and so forth, ad nauseum.

That is quite simply a summary of US/Israeli propaganda, which has already been thouroughly discredited and exposed. Interesting that is it not? The sensational 'leaks', which are front page news world-wide, actually justify and vindicate the propaganda and lies we have been fed over the past decade. Now that's interesting! Is it not?

To anyone capable of critical thought that should appear to be quite a neat little coincidence....

So what does this boil down to?

First, US diplomats get to take a free shot at the rest of world leadership and no forum is provided from which the damaged parties may respond. Is that damaging? Nope, that's a fantastic opportunity to take the piss gratuitously with a view to influencing public opinion back home I'd say.

Second, the case for a war against Iran is greatly reinforced, we are even told that Arab leaders are putting pressure on the US to attack Iran. Great stuff. Lets step in and teach the schoolyard bully a lesson.

While we are on Iran, we need to mention that they are smuggling explosives into Iraq. It was 'leaked' so it must be true, right? What an idiotic notion ... please! One day they have sophisticated weapons of mass destruction and the next they need Iran's help to make pipe-bombs. Uh-huh. Logic be damned. I'd bet top dollar you can buy explosives and weapons in Iraq more readily than you can get medications and food, WITHOUT Iranian interference. As someone more knowledgable than myself put it:

"The idea that anyone would need to bring weapons into Iraq is insane, simply another Israeli ploy to pre-stage an attack on Iran. Any fool can see this in seconds. The idea that “secret agents” are smuggling ordnance into Iraq, a country loaded with explosives, is insane."

Third, the war on terror is alive and well because...get this: Osama lives!

Fourth, Pakistan is a dangerous terrorist abetting country, and therefore the daily predator attacks on 'terrorist safe-havens' must be justified too. Fantastic, here was me thinking we were violating the airspace of a sovereign nation and bombing innocent civilians....

Damage? Where? Reads like an Israeli wish-list so far... they don't celebrate Christmas but they sure seem to be petitioning Santa Claus anyway, just to be on the safe side probably...

And finally, tour the propaganda outlets - pardon me, the mainstream press - and you will see that the solution to the problem has already been identified:

- Excecute the guilty party, as a future warning to anyone who might consider blowing the whistle on governement activity in a bid to hold them accountable. Only weird, sexual-predator type individuals would stoop to fighting lies with truth anyway, so in future we can shoot first and ask questions later. I might insert a caveat here: at this point we are still unsure whether the latest intelligence-community-puppet is a sexual predator or not. The Swedish prosecutors have yet to finish plucking the daisy petals: raped her - raped her not - raped her ....

- Pass sweeping legislation to clamp down on the internet, which is where all these weird, sexual predator-type individuals spend most of their time. Why would you seek sources of alternative news when you have free, independant, morally upright and 100% truthful mainstream media? You don't, unless you are somehow guilty. Guilty of what you may ask? Don't let that worry you, that's just a formality....



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 07:07 AM
link   
reply to post by D377MC
 


If one has something to say and it is Of worth to mankind, should he/she have your floor of attention?
Is this a question?
Give a feller a chance to speak his mind.
If it resonates, good for you.....and him/her.

Truth is sexless.
Hence, all the trouble.
As the man in my family, I make the final decisions though choose not to be a fool of indecision.
Take counsel of your wife, for she knows you best. To take the good and bad with assumption; to take counsel in another if their words rIng as true as blue. Ah, you know. If your 'paid' I'll know. Till then, speak Up, my Brother, speak Up my man.
edit on 49am22073112731201012 by Perseus Apex because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Perseus Apex
 


Sorry, what on earth are you talking about? Do you mind reformulating? I have absolutely no clue of the point you are making, and even less how it ties in with the rest of the thread....



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by D377MC
 


If one has something to say that rhymes with Reason I should suppose it's worth the listen.
You speak as one who is employed to speak, not that one who is of free mind.
You know this.
Are you to live with it?
Your choice.
edit on 49am10072812731201012 by Perseus Apex because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 07:27 AM
link   
reply to post by D377MC
 


It may help if you 'fine tune' the question.
Sounds like a lot of hot air with no where to go.
Waiting patiently.
Shoot.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Perseus Apex
 


I guess that if you are making sense to yourself then we are halfway there: I have no idea what you are talking about.

You do seem to imply I am paid to post disinformation: a quick check of my previous posts will easily disprove that - maybe you should check before formulating your posts next time.

If you have any reactions to my post, why don't you quote what I said and be specific, otherwise we are wasting time.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 07:34 AM
link   
Perhaps I was/am your friend in the End?
My intentions are quite obvious with my collective posts here on ATS.
I have had 'many' opportunites to sell out my fellow brethren.
Your welcome though am I welcome to your 'owners'?
Speak freely or be a subject as a slave.

I don't believe I have misled one to date.
My time is valuable.
I'd rather not waste it.

Later folks.
Shutting eyes.
edit on 49am39090312931201012 by Perseus Apex because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
57
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join