Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Wikileaks nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

page: 2
26
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by FalselyFlagged
 


....You just described World War I and II my friend. Just stop talking you're dumb...

But thanks for proving my point.

Edit: War - a conflict carried on by force of arms, as between nations or between parties within a nation; warfare, as by land, sea, or air.

Dictionary.com


So now you can tell me, (or not, because you'll probably make a jackass out of yourself again), how was Tunisia NOT a war?
edit on 2-2-2011 by apodictic because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   
And I like how everyone is trying to nit-pick but isn't defending Julian's "coincidental" ties with the world's most powerful zionist neo-cons....
edit on 2-2-2011 by apodictic because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by apodictic
And I like how everyone is trying to nit-pick but isn't defending Julian's "coincidental" ties with the world's most powerful zionist neo-cons....
edit on 2-2-2011 by apodictic because: (no reason given)


Please elaborate on the ties..
Proof of donations, amounts etc..

I;ve heard it all before but seen little proof..



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by apodictic
 


Because it wasn't a war... lol. It was some protests and they took over the government and the president left within a few days.


So are you telling me its a bad thing for people to stand up for their freedoms against a corrupt and evil dictator?

You can say I'm dumb all you want, but no fear mongers even on Fox news is saying it was a war.


So are you saying that Arabs deserve no rights and deserve to be dominated by evil people who torture them if they dissagree with their corruption? And that's a good thing?



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Well, to start you off, here's the Waddesdon Trust, and you can see "Lord Rothschild" under Trustees. There's your link to Julian and Rothschild.

www.charityperformance.com...

I don't know why you're asking for proof of donation? Wouldn't the evidence of that completely ruin Assange's agenda?

Read this.

poorrichards-blog.blogspot.com...



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by FalselyFlagged
 


Exactly. How AWFUL that leaked information that governments arent acting in their people's best interest spark protest and uprising in the people.

Those kinds of conflicts are HORRIBLE. (Even though America was founded on that kind of revolt, lets forget that)

Just wars, wars worth fighting, are trumped up wars like the Iraq war that serve the rich at the expense of Americans, their allies, and Iraqi's alike. Right?



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by apodictic
 



*disinformation*


The fact is your right. I used to support Julian Assange until this article recently came up. When I read that the information was leaked by the WikiLeaks, then I knew this was disinformation. Anyone that has done some serious research into 911 knows this information is disinformation.


US hunting previously unknown 9/11 gang: cable

www.rawstory.com...

What I really find amazing is Julian Assange believes there is no conspiracy in 911 and he has publically made this statement in a recent interview.
My opinion is Julian Assange can not be trusted, and his information, either the man is seriously misinformed, or he is protecting the insiders in our government who pulled off this false flag.


Wikileaks Julian Assange Miffed by 9/11 Truthers and Bilderberg Watchers

His obsession with secrecy, both in others and maintaining his own, lends him the air of a conspiracy theorist. Is he one? “I believe in facts about conspiracies,” he says, choosing his words slowly. “Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It’s important not to confuse these two. Generally, when there’s enough facts about a conspiracy we simply call this news.” What about 9/11? [color=gold] “I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.” What about the Bilderberg conference? “That is vaguely conspiratorial, in a networking sense. We have published their meeting notes.”
Mr. Assange seems to have conveniently forgotten that 9/11 may be, in a very concrete sense, a ‘conspiracy for war’, leading directly to the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and the permanent “War on Terror”.

www.menwithfoilhats.com...

Talk about a good way to convince everyone all over the world to believe in Julian Assange is out to exposed corrupt governments, corrupt corporations, corrupt militaries, however in order to exspose all these corruptions there has to be a conspiracy. 911 was the greatest attack on American soil besides Pearl Harbor, yet the United States has never investigated 911. The American people have not had any of their questions answered truthfully, and most people do not trust our government any longer, because of how our governments handle the 911 event. This alone reeks of inside conspiracy, the conspiracy of inside secrecy.

Julian Assange, you do not fool me.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by FalselyFlagged
reply to post by apodictic
 


Because it wasn't a war... lol. It was some protests and they took over the government and the president left within a few days.


So are you telling me its a bad thing for people to stand up for their freedoms against a corrupt and evil dictator?

You can say I'm dumb all you want, but no fear mongers even on Fox news is saying it was a war.


So are you saying that Arabs deserve no rights and deserve to be dominated by evil people who torture them if they dissagree with their corruption? And that's a good thing?


I clearly just gave you a definition of the word war, and you're still denying it? Over 200 people died, and it's referred to as "The Jasmine Revolution" Jasmines are red....AKA blood. A war is a war, it wasn't just "some protests"

I never said they didn't have a right to stand up to their government. But they don't need Julian Assange to realize oppression, just like I don't need someone to tell me what's BS and what's not. I actually have a brain and can use it accordingly. Anyone can create a "leak" site and fill it with horse # and people will still think it's credible because it has the word "leak" in it. God, man...some people...

Tell me WHY you think Assange is a credible source. You probably haven't even thought of that. You just take it at face value and leave it as-is.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Thank you brother.

You people need to realize the whole point of wikileaks is to take your attention away from the important things, and put it on something else. Assange is not some little angel here to tell the truth.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


Why do you people continually try to take what I'm saying out of context? No where did I say they didn't have a right to a revolution. I'm talking about the lies that dropped the lit match on the gasoline so to speak.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by apodictic
 


OMG Thank you!


I'm surprised more people on ATS don't think like you! Deny Ignorance... wikileaks is obviously a free flowing disinformation tactic... the best place to hide a lie is in between truth.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   
Wikileaks - Nobel Peace Prize. For all those that really believe that, don't hold you breath...wait do!



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by SalemRaven
 


WOW another one


So far I've only seen about 3 other people on here who can see wikileaks for what it is. It's starting to get really sad how hard it is to convince these people that they're being lied to, even with all the pieces of the puzzle clearly put in front of them they continue to act like a retarded child and not realize how to put them together.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by SlovenlyGhost
 


You are misinformed my friend... wikileaks stinks of disinfo.
besides do you think anyone exposing TRUE government, military, and big company secrets would every get any sort of air time on any news station, or do you think they would just disappear overnight.

The first rule of disinformation is: "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is."
You got to dig way deeper for the real dirt, not just go to a website as you one stop shop.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by apodictic
reply to post by SalemRaven
 


WOW another one


So far I've only seen about 3 other people on here who can see wikileaks for what it is. It's starting to get really sad how hard it is to convince these people that they're being lied to, even with all the pieces of the puzzle clearly put in front of them they continue to act like a retarded child and not realize how to put them together.


Even by your own admissions it's not true that we have been "lied to"..
Are you not saying it's more like the selective telling of truths??
I have seen no lies from wiki...



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Okay, maybe lie is the wrong word.

Manipulated and misguided would be better words to use. It's full of disinfo. There are definitely selective truths used only to support his agenda, though.

Edit: But lied to in the sense that his "only agenda" is "government transparency" when it's plainly obvious he has agendas that reach further than that.
edit on 2-2-2011 by apodictic because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:54 PM
link   
What bothers me most, and I just don't get it, especially on ATS. WikiLeaks portrays themselves as 'truth givers', and everyone lines up - no questions asked.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by StlSteve
 


Exactly. People fail to ask WHO is Julian Assange? WHY is he a credible source?

And better yet, if he's such a big threat to governments all over, WHY hasn't he been killed yet?



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by apodictic
reply to post by backinblack
 


Okay, maybe lie is the wrong word.

Manipulated and misguided would be better words to use. It's full of disinfo. There are definitely selective truths used only to support his agenda, though.

Edit: But lied to in the sense that his "only agenda" is "government transparency" when it's plainly obvious he has agendas that reach further than that.
edit on 2-2-2011 by apodictic because: (no reason given)


That's better..
But smart people will decide what is worth listening to..
If it trully was a front then I'd expect LIES..
That's why I'm still on the fence with wiki..
BTW, Wiki has released far more information than MSM cares to print..
Maybe It's MSM that's the disinfo guys selecting what to tell..



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by apodictic
 


What lie, specifically, are you alluding to, and what evidence do you have that the information Assange is spreading is false?

And in regard to your theory about crashing the banking system to give governments the excuse to impose martial law, or suspend rights, or whatever, Im not totally opposed to that line of thought. But why did they not use the much more convenient market crash? Why go to all the trouble of bailing out this and that, trying desperately to prevent a run on banks, when your end goal is a run on banks? What makes you think a leak about one bank, even a major bank, is a better opportunity to bring the whole banking system to its knees than the opportunity they already had?

If Assange is such a disinfo agent, why prevent him from spreading disinfo? Why cut off his access to donations? Why, when you are forced to spread the leaks by his manipulating of media against each other, waste the time spinning it as not important if you want people to bite on that hook?

It doesnt add up. Your scenarios dont make good sense.

And not every conspiracy theorist believes that our government set up 9-11. I dont. I believe they may have known about it in advance and let it happen, like Pearl Harbor. But I dont believe they planned it and manned it. I believe they took advantage of something someone else planned and manned.






top topics



 
26
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join