WikiLeaks gags staff, threatens leakers with $20 million penalty

reply to post by ~Lucidity


Well lets see in comparison Wiki-Leaks will sue it's employees for up to 20 Million dollars.

Imagine what the Banking Cartel would sue Wiki-Leaks for if it started releasing that information.

Now on the flip side, how much would the Banking Cartel pay Wiki-Leaks not to release the information?

For all we know, Assange is running a big dollar extortion and black mail ring, feeding us gossip on documented but widely unreported events and relatively meaningless diplomatic cables about some third world leader who likes to wear girls pink bikini underwear, while he takes a under the table bribe to some swiss or caymen islands bank account for sitting on the stuff that really hurts.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Could well be the case, though Assange will deny that to the grave. Many will wish for this to not be true, but as we know, everyone has their price.

The "embarrassing" communications between world diplomats was a bit of disappointment, both in how little they revealed and the tone of it. If that was a shot across the bow, it failed. If they're paying WikiLeaks to not post that some ambassador somewhere loves wear pink frilly undies, then it's become a sham. But I'm not counting them out yet. Assange is driven. He's probably run into the goons you've mentioned, but I don't think he's caved...yet. Just a feeling. And if he does, he knows the truth will come out.

It's a dilemma for all. And a huge frustration for those who pinned some hopes on transparency.

reply to post by ~Lucidity


Oh please don't misunderstand me, the pink underwear releases are designed to give Wiki-leaks credibility, it's the truly explosive stuff on the banking and oil cartel and shadow government that they might be paid to keep under wraps.

What Wiki- has really done is leaked and sold us an idea, that some independent organization has lots of information it's gotten through a wide variety of means that is explosive and truthful in nature and it could make a big difference in bringing government back in line.

The truth is everything it has released are pink underwear stories or simply things under reported in the news like the murder of Iraqi civilians and journalists by US Forces.

In other words the relatively harmless leaks coupled with the threat of much more explosive things to come make Wiki the hope of underdogs and truth seekers everywhere.

The reality is those revalations never come, just the pink underwear stories, and the stuff the press simply didn't make a big deal about.

Meanwhile people donate lots of money, and who knows what Assange is really doing with the explosive stuff.

We know what he isn't doing, and that's releasing it for us to see.

Ummm....their friggin' name is "wikiLEAKS". Leaks. Leaks. Leaks.

Their job is to LEAK information, not seal it up.

I feel like we just stepped through the looking glass into Wonderland.

What next, Pentagon requiring employees to sign "Disclosure Agreements" which makes it illegal for them *not* to give away state secrets???

reply to post by Cryptonomicon


Just stepped through the looking glass into wonderland? Well welcome aboard.

I have been here for about 40 years now, do you have any news of earth you can share?

Have the Beetles put out a new album recently?

Sadly this is par for the course.

Thanks for posting.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

No misunderstanding and just a minor disagreement about that one batch of releases having given them credibility. There has been some damning stuff...on Afghanistan in particular. And it was rumored there was even more on Iran. So where's that? I sit as frustrated as many people. Do it or stop calling yourself a change agent.

reply to post by ~Lucidity


See that's the point, half the stuff the release is actually being used for instigating more war, Libya, Iran, etc.

It's very hard for me to not see Wiki-leaks helping the government in some real regards.

When it can't with hard fact, like in the case of Iran it does with inuendo, we have stuff, it's going to be big.

People believe, they want to believe, but I don't know if it's safe to believe, based on the actual performance and how Wiki seems to be operating

I'm a huge fan of open source as a concept, and freedom of ALL information.

But a half lie is still a lie, and selective revelation is still manipulation.

The more that is being revealed, the more i have to agree with your view Proto; something is rotten in Wikiland.

Thanks for sharing!

Wikileaks is not a whistleblower entity. It's a publisher entity. Like it or not the servers etc. run on money.

Originally posted by harryhaller
I'm a huge fan of open source as a concept, and freedom of ALL information.

But a half lie is still a lie, and selective revelation is still manipulation.

The more that is being revealed, the more i have to agree with your view Proto; something is rotten in Wikiland.

Thanks for sharing!

Thanks my friend, it's just the same old, same old, with someone else stealing their way to gate keeper, instead of getting elected as one.

It would be interested to see how much money Assange really makes, and what all he expenses out to the company too.

Thanks for posting.

All I have to say about this is
it is very hypocritical
They are acting like , what they intended to expose, sad just sad

Yeah, Proto, what you said...!

I've said in dozens of my posts - WHY does anyone believe WikiLeaks??

He and his "team" haven't got PFC Manning released, have they? No, they have not. Assange is not an American citizen.

IF and yes, I mean *IF* there is a shadow government conspiring to bring on a NWO, why on earth would they not have found a way to shut down WikiLeaks?

It seems absolutely impossible that he is NOT being controlled by money, threats, frauds, etc. I've wondered since WL first "appeared" how he is immune to what most people would be punished for doing -- and as a result, I am more skeptical than ever.


It is to the point now that I don't believe ANYTHING, or ANYONE in the media, or on the internet. Including a whole lot of what I see right here on ATS. Instead, recently I have been simply looking at English language newspapers from smaller countries and I have been getting a much more well-rounded view of how the world sees and views and spits on one another.

I echo the poster who said Assange is not a "truther". "He's a PUBLISHER".

He's no different than Alex Jones, in my opinion. I don't believe either of them, though at one time or another I have believed both. And Proto, can you tell me -- where do YOU go for credible reporting? Can I sign up for that?

sigh.
EDIT to add:
I used to be a fanatic believer in NPR as the best non-biased news source. Then I was persuaded by someone who told me they are liberal in their reporting. I started to doubt them. Which leaves where to go??

Originally posted by wildtimes
Yeah, Proto, what you said...!

I've said in dozens of my posts - WHY does anyone believe WikiLeaks??

He and his "team" haven't got PFC Manning released, have they? No, they have not. Assange is not an American citizen.

How you suppose they do that? Strap on an M60 and go rambo on them?

Julian Assange doesn't deserve any peace prize of any sort.

He does speeches, and try to get people on his side.
Tell the man to just shut the hell up and leak information, WE DON"T GIVE A RATS ASS ABOUT HIM.


He's not even important, the people who go to him with the information are.

Oh he speaks. Might be that he is WL spokesperson?

We need a new site, for WikiLeaks Leaks.

.

I don't think you can claim leaked documents as "property". That is absurd.

That's like me stealing your property and claiming it's my property now. What the hell?

These documents are the property of the people who pay taxes into their governments.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
I don't think you can claim leaked documents as "property". That is absurd.

That's like me stealing your property and claiming it's my property now. What the hell?

These documents are the property of the people who pay taxes into their governments.

Technincally under Common Law possession is 9/10th of the law, hence why Proto still hasn't been able to sue to get his soul back after all these years!

Let me tell you never smile at a Devil with the Blue Dress on, it sure can lead to complications.

Originally posted by zookey


We need a new site, for WikiLeaks Leaks.

.

Hopefully one of the things that the take from Wikileaks to that new site won't be the non-disclosure agreement.

Thanks for posting.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Wikileaks doing standard practice "Corporate Ethics Training"? Isn't that an oximoron?
The corporate lawyers are loose again...