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.


Who would be a Whistleblower?

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 09:10 AM
What would be the point in blowing the whistle on something or exposing something? No one believes you, your character is assassinated and you risk losing your life.

I find it interesting that on ATS, a site that where people moan about the lies in the MSM and governments and corporations, that when someone comes forward and blows the whistle, they are given the same treatment dished out by the MSM.

I thought we would encourage whistle blowers, not criticize them at every turn and judge and shoot down the messenger. Look how Assange is being made to look like Public enemy no.1, the threats of a police raid to another nations Embassy. Why? Over one man? I would say this is nothing about Assange and everything to do with America wanting to get their hands on Assange and to shut wikileaks down.

just because the leaks didn't reveal what some people wanted or some or what some had always suspected, does not make the importance of whistleblowers and the information they provide.

It's funny how people are angry at Assange and wikileaks, yet not much emotion towards the actions of the governments exposed.

I imagine if there are other whistleblowers out there, they will be taking a very good look at what is going on and thinking twice about coming forward.

posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 10:15 AM
reply to post by woodwardjnr

dont let the disinfo campaign
get you down, mate.

posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 10:26 AM
I agree with you that the whole Assange situation makes it fairly obvious that it is about much more than one guy. I also agree that it matters less what specific information a whistle blower provides than the fact that the whistle is being blown.

However it's also possible that either a whistle blower is fabricating information, or are unwittingly redistributing fabricated information. It is wise to taking all information with a grain of salt and to be critical.

I think most genuine whistle blowers are well aware that they will not be believed right away and may even face ridicule and attacks, but they come forward anyway, which is an admirable trait in my opinion. Thus I have to disagree that Assange's treatment would significantly affect other whistle blowers' decision to come forward.

And for the record, I am quite certain that the Assange issue has stirred people up about the governments. The problem is that the people being stirred up are already aware of how corrupt governments are, so we are stirred up just not surprised.

posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 06:53 PM
I would still do it for the small chance that it will make a difference.

If I had access to secrets or lies that either the government or business was keeping from the people – I would release them, because it is in the best interests of the people.

Assanage & Manning have woken a lot of people up, and no matter how hard the US government tries to stop it – I hope more people expose the lies and corruption.

The secrets need to stop to have an open and transparent government, if I have to sacrifice myself to do that – so be it.


new topics

top topics

log in