Something Stinks About Wikileaks

- The evidence suggests however that far from an honest leak, it is a calculated disinformation to the gain of the US and perhaps Israeli and Indian intelligence and a coverup of the US and Western role in drug trafficking out of Afghanistan. -

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This was my view in many threads, but some people laughed and said for once the truth has been exposed and people still don't believe.

I still don't believe, this looks like controlled leak to me:

The evidence suggests however that far from an honest leak, it is a calculated disinformation to the gain of the US and perhaps Israeli and Indian intelligence and a coverup of the US and Western role in drug trafficking out of Afghanistan.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

My theory was:

1. The first leak was a honest leak, but after the first leak the government saw it and didn't miss the chance to use the world wide attention in regards as a PR campaign and as a propaganda campaign. Even the Afghan resistance is downloading and reading the files.

So the government orchestrated another leak. People can say what ever they want, but the truth is the US government can pay someone credible to leak files the government wants him to leak.

2. The first leak was just to make the second leak look credible and give wikileak credibility and fame. This would be true if the founder of Wikileak was involved in this scam. More weight is put on when thinking Australia's role in regards.

The London Financial Times says Gul’s name appears in about 10 of roughly 180 classified US files that allege Pakistan’s intelligence service supported Afghan militants fighting Nato forces. Gul told the newspaper the US has lost the war in Afghanistan, and that the leak of the documents would help the Obama administration deflect blame by suggesting that Pakistan was responsible. Gul told the paper, “I am a very favourite whipping boy of America. They can’t imagine the Afghans can win wars on their own. It would be an abiding shame that a 74-year-old general living a retired life manipulating the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan results in the defeat of America.”

www.veteranstoday.com...

Listen to the words of Mr. Gul (by the way, Gul means flower, nice name ^^)

As well, in a UPI interview on September 26, 2001, two weeks after the 9-11 attacks, Gul stated, in reply to the question who did Black Sept. 11?, “Mossad and its accomplices. The US spends $40 billion a year on its 11 intelligence agencies. That’s $400 billion in 10 years. Yet the Bush Administration says it was taken by surprise. I don’t believe it. Within 10 minutes of the second twin tower being hit in the World Trade Center CNN said Osama bin Laden had done it. That was a planned piece of disinformation by the real perpetrators”

Great article, worth a read.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Nah, I don't go with this. The diary contains many, many reports of huge, and I mean huge stashes of opiates and opium equipment seized in Afghanistan all the way through the entire war. It doesn't appear to be any kind of lip service.

I also don't think that information regarding the killing of many innocent people and the very serious government cover-ups of friendly fire incidents, would be released to hide drug trafficking. That seems absurd. The information released has done absolutely nothing for the government, in fact it has embarrassed them world-wide.

I also think that Australia's role has nothing to do with the kind of person Assange is, or the likelihood that he would be involved in something dodgy. Just because Australia might behave a certain way, does not relate to Wikileaks or Assange at all, without proof. He just happens to come from there. There are many people who are involved in Wikileaks from all around the world.

reply to post by qualitygossip


I call it control leak, it was controlled, what gets leaked and what is not.

That means control leak. Do you find it odd that nothing new is present in this leak?

We already knew everything.

And to say it has done nothing good to the US government would be an understatement.

The US is loosing the war in Afghanistan, has many hard secrets it doesn't want exposed (after the completely failure), if you think this is big you are dreaming. This is just the tip of the ice berg and the tip of the ice berg is leaked with control to paint a distorted picture of the war.

I think it would be naive and just that for the US intelligence organization not to use Wikileak as propaganda front. It is just naive to the maximum proportion.

If they are that stupid to not use Wikileak, which even Taliban is paying attention to, then they are a bunch of useless morons and don't know what intelligence means.

Think about it, the US can even use Wikileaks to let Taliban do the jobs of special ops. I suspect this leak was a test to see if the Taliban would read it, and if they read it how would they react. Think about it, next leak they could post the name of some wanted Taliban, and call them informants then boom, they will killed by the Taliban under spy charges.

There was lots of new information that had either previously been unreported or covered up. Just one example was the Canadian soldiers who were killed by friendly fire. The government had reported it as an insurgent attack at the time when it happened. There are lots of examples like that.

Here's a link to a live conference with Julian Assange, it's on just now if anyone is interested.
Wikileaks conference

I'll be back afterwards as this is a very interesting thread and it's interesting to see people's opinions.

reply to post by oozyism


I too speculated this and wondered why Wikileak's are holding back on 15,000 files that could potentially expose an awful lot more of the corruption behind the U.S. Why don't their source's allow them to spill the bean's or will they use the 15,000 document's as an excuse to start world war 3 because that would be the final straw to pick to cause all havoc and chaos.

People laugh because they're scared. I'm not laughing!

There's an empty seat where Assange should be sitting. I missed the start so I don't know if he is late or something?

reply to post by qualitygossip

There was lots of new information that had either previously been unreported or covered up. Just one example was the Canadian soldiers who were killed by friendly fire. The government had reported it as an insurgent attack at the time when it happened. There are lots of examples like that.

If it didn't even have something as insignificant as that, then suspicion would be doubled in regards.

I will repeat, the tip of the ice berg.

I know they released some small, very small secrets for the sake of making it look like a leak, nothing more than that. The agenda behind it is much bigger.

Originally posted by qualitygossip
There was lots of new information that had either previously been unreported or covered up. Just one example was the Canadian soldiers who were killed by friendly fire. The government had reported it as an insurgent attack at the time when it happened. There are lots of examples like that.

Here's a link to a live conference with Julian Assange, it's on just now if anyone is interested.
Wikileaks conference

I'll be back afterwards as this is a very interesting thread and it's interesting to see people's opinions.

Collateral damage and friendly fire is a way of de-populating and the government will continue to use these strategies and keep from the public unknowningly.

Of course it's a controlled leak. Leaks always are.

By someone and for a reason and with an agenda.

Now, who or what that is, is another question.