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.


Wikileaks did nothing wrong. Why? Because water boarding isn't torture.

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 10:34 AM
-Water boarding isn't torture, so wikileaks isn't doing anything wrong.
-The president lied about WMD's in Iraq but the invasion was necessary, so wikileaks is necessary.
-People who believe 9/11 was an inside job are conspiracy theorists. People who believe wikileaks is breaking the law are conspiracy theorists.
-Everyone who owns a corporation while also serving as a member of government bailing out that same corporation does not have a conflict of interest, everything they do is fine. Everything wikileaks is doing is fine.
-The American public does not have a problem with the federal reserve, with the middle east wars, supporting Israel, or outlawing constitutional rights. The American public does not have a problem with wikileaks.
-TSA pat downs are not an invasion of fourth amendment rights. Wikileaks is not an invasion of anyone's rights.
-The government is not endangering its own citizens by funding the terrorists. Wikileaks is not endangering anyone's safety.
-The government never lies to us. Wikileaks never lies to us.

posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 11:10 AM
reply to post by filosophia

This reminds me a lot of Ron Paul's speech governing Wikileaks and our government's falsehood. Great post regarding the reverse logic used to shine light on their faults.

posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 11:23 AM
reply to post by Emmett

almost point for point.

here is a list Paul spoke at the end:

Number 1: Do the America People deserve know the truth regarding the ongoing wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen?
Number 2: Could a larger question be how can an army private access so much secret information?
Number 3: Why is the hostility directed at Assange, the publisher, and not at our governments failure to protect classified information?
Number 4: Are we getting our moneys worth of the 80 Billion dollars per year spent on intelligence gathering?
Number 5: Which has resulted in the greatest number of deaths: lying us into war or Wikileaks revelations or the release of the Pentagon Papers?
Number 6: If Assange can be convicted of a crime for publishing information that he did not steal, what does this say about the future of the first amendment and the independence of the internet?
Number 7: Could it be that the real reason for the near universal attacks on Wikileaks is more about secretly maintaining a seriously flawed foreign policy of empire than it is about national security?
Number 8: Is there not a huge difference between releasing secret information to help the enemy in a time of declared war, which is treason, and the releasing of information to expose our government lies that promote secret wars, death and corruption?
Number 9: Was it not once considered patriotic to stand up to our government when it is wrong?

posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 11:29 AM
reply to post by filosophia

Great example of how these wolves in sheeps clothing always twist logic to suite their needs. You are right, why would they be so worried if everything being exposed was entirely legal and they had the best interests of the people in it. They do not. So they lie when it might hurt them, and they prosecute others where they bring the truth.

posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 06:58 AM
Some conspiracy theorists are paranoid that a secretive international group controls things behind the scenes, these nutjobs are racist and ignorant. similar to this ridiculous theory is there are other paranoid conspiracy theorists who believe in an international group of anonymous hackers, who manipulate things behind the scenes. These conspiracy theorists are just paranoid bigots who hate the truth.

Some people claim the towers fell in correlation with explosives, these deluded zombies think the "Bush administration" had something to do with it. Others believe wikileaks leads an army of zombie hackers, and "Assange" did it. It's merely a coincidence that wikileaks happened to give out secret information. The information existed in one form or another, wikileaks merely brought it to the public attention. Any attempt to prove wikileaks manipulated said data is a ridiculous racist theory bred from inborn fear of truth and justice.

Some people want to go as far as accusing respectable men of genocide, claiming they are putting the world's greatest invention, fluoride, into the water. Others believe we should be so paranoid of the truth that we censor the internet.

Some people love a good conspiracy, no matter how ridiculous, the more ridiculous, the better. Other people just love to hate on a minority race, muslims, gays, nerds, they just really enjoy defamation.

Some people follow politics and listen to alternative media, which hasn't been censored by the government so who knows if it is true or not since the government never lies. Other people follow truther arguments, rapidly tearing down the individual whenever they come up with an argument, believing attacking the person is getting somewhere closer to the truth.

Some people think the CIA is always out to get them, ready to give them a toxic mind eraser nano thermite injection. Other people always think Bin Laden's out to get them, hiding in a bush, his beard camouflaging his face and getting NORAD to stand down.

Some people think maybe Bin Laden died 9 years ago, and either way it's sort of weird the government just stopped caring about him, placing the blame on some other guys that said in court they were not part of 9/11. Others think that American veterans are going to join al qaeda and so we need to harass anyone with a Ron Paul sticker on their car.

Ok, do you get it? Some people are just dumb.

Ok, and now to be serious. Did wikileaks do something wrong? Under the law, of course. They gave out top secret information. The law is most likely written down somewhere. They may need to have a team of lawyers and judges search through the thousands of laws and find the right law, but then again, even if they did do this, they only charged Assange with a ridiculous rape charge, though that is coming from the media who is known to lie. Regardless of the rape charge, which was consensual and therefore not rape, but is the result of the redefinition of rape as not wearing a condom, which since it can still be consensual, is still not rape. Plus, anytime the government redefines a word it is grounds for corruption, the definition of words can be expanded upon but never changed, a synonym can not suddenly change into an antonym just because it fits a political ideology. So what wikileaks did under the law is wrong, but why then go after Assange? Normally, people hide behind the corporation, so that the corporation is blamed, in other words, Haliburton is blamed, not Cheney, BP is blamed, not Tony Hayward. So why blame Assange? Would they arrest wikileaks? Or would they simply give them a fine? But how could they give them a fine when it is out of the country? So is there an international law that governs whether or not the U.S. can prosecute wikileaks? If there is, I'm sure the United States has been guilty of many more violations than wikileaks. So if you were guilty of war crimes and international espionage, would a court respect your attempt at prosecuting another law abiding citizen just because they broke one crime? Interestingly, these global elite want a one world government but they don't even follow the one they already have, or maybe that is the point. The voice of the world will be the judge of this issue, not a court of law, and rightfully so, the voice of the world will eventually find the right court of law to suit their needs, but by that point they will already be more interested in the next topic that comes up.

new topics

top topics

log in