Wikileaks docs release akin to 9/11

Please hear me out, this WikiLeaks leak of documents from the war is an affront to seize the internet. Obviously, if the pentagon and CIA really wanted to prevent the dissemination of these documents they could do so.

I asked a few questions about the aftermath of releasing these documents.

Why would the American government allow it?
1. They cannot stop it? - unlikely
2. They can benefit in the long run - likely

What's the worst that could happen?
1. The world turns against America and we're alone in the mid east, and we get forced to leave - unlikely
remember, most Americans will not go to the website, will not read the documents, if something doesn't grab their attention within 15 seconds or come on a television set it doesn't have a chance (key: most Americans are against the release)
2. a few libertarian, anti-war people, civil justice types get really upset and the world casts a frown upon USA actions for a few days - likely

What does the government have to gain?
1. nothing - unlikely
2. complete control of the internet in America - likely

If you look around and talk to most people, they are very upset that this man released these documents. They categorize him as aiding and abetting terrorists, and they want his head. Many people feel this man is attacking America via the internet. In a sense, this is like 9/11 making most Americans scared of terrorists and desiring the head of Osama and led to the PATRIOT act. Wikileaks attack is actually better in that it doesn't require any American deaths or a big physical mess.

Now, this year a new "internet censorship" law has been proposed. I refer you to this link for complete details. www.rollingout.com...

But in short the law is S.3804 or the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA).

So, I expect this WikiLeaks release to be the foundation of the argument FOR this new act and others like it. Also, this Wikileak will be the catalysts that "riles up" most Americans meaning an easy passage through the house and senate, with exception to Ron Paul of course.

I'm curious what you all think and I apologize if someone else posted this.

My apologies.. but I have to disagree with just about ever premise of your post. In fact you contradict yourself enough to discredit your own post title. 9/11 was a polarizing global event that had an overwhelming and immediate impact on almost everyone. How can you compare this leak to 9/11 and then in the very next paragraph express your opinion that most Americans are soo apathetic about the release that they probably won't visit the site. You then contradict yourself again by saying that most people are against the leak.

First of all... the release of this information is hardly as emotionally shocking as 9/11. If the MSM is pretty much ignoring it. When I went to CNN last night the story about a paraplegic female athlete had a larger headline than the wiki leaks story. Secondly, I think most Americans are actually in favor of the truth. I have talked to several people I know about this and there opinions ranged from apathetic to supportive. Only one person out of maybe 50 was vehemently opposed. I think you'll find that most of the opposed people on this site are the same people that think all of the ufo videos over the last few days are really sky divers.

And also.. if the government really wanted to use this like a 9/11 this leak would have gotten more coverage than the chilean miner rescue last week. We would have 24/7 non stop analysis about how this is dangerous to Americans... but we don't.

So anyway.. yea just my thoughts.. but definitely no 9/11 lol.......

Thanks for your response. I think you mistook some of my statements. I meant similar in potential results, not amplitude of event. Yes, most Americans won't care, but most of those that do will be against the release and favor this new internet censorship law. I have to disagree that if asked, most americans would consider this an act against us and for the terrorists.

It seems that you actually believe 9/11 occurred....i'm a non-believer but to each their own belief.

Honestly I don't know how covered this story is (no tv), but I think the govt doesn't want to over-play it, rather just show it enough to get it into peoples minds so that when they vote on this bill and mention wikileaks the majority of people will be like "oh yeah".

reply to post by BenIndaSun


I apologize if I mis-understood. I don't think 9/11 happened the way it officially was reported to happen.. but it definitely happened. I guess I am still in the "wiki leaks is doing the world a solid by leaking this information camp" I am not sold on the idea that it is a CIA front or false flag operation. It seems like most events that happen lately that go against the political status quo are labeled disinfo or false flags.

It hurts my brain to think that everything people try to say or do against the PTB is immediately discredited by being accused of being created by the PTB.

www.wired.com...

Cryptome, a separate secret-spilling site, has speculated that the new file added days later may have been posted as insurance in case something happens to the WikiLeaks website or to the organization’s founder, Julian Assange. In either scenario, WikiLeaks volunteers, under a prearranged agreement with Assange, could send out a password or passphrase to allow anyone who has downloaded the file to open it.

Read More www.wired.com...

I wonder what is in this insurance file.

Originally posted by BenIndaSun

Please hear me out, this WikiLeaks leak of documents from the war is an affront to seize the internet. Obviously, if the pentagon and CIA really wanted to prevent the dissemination of these documents they could do so.

I asked a few questions about the aftermath of releasing these documents.

Why would the American government allow it?
1. They cannot stop it? - unlikely
2. They can benefit in the long run - likely

What's the worst that could happen?
1. The world turns against America and we're alone in the mid east, and we get forced to leave - unlikely
remember, most Americans will not go to the website, will not read the documents, if something doesn't grab their attention within 15 seconds or come on a television set it doesn't have a chance (key: most Americans are against the release)
2. a few libertarian, anti-war people, civil justice types get really upset and the world casts a frown upon USA actions for a few days - likely

What does the government have to gain?
1. nothing - unlikely
2. complete control of the internet in America - likely

If you look around and talk to most people, they are very upset that this man released these documents. They categorize him as aiding and abetting terrorists, and they want his head. Many people feel this man is attacking America via the internet. In a sense, this is like 9/11 making most Americans scared of terrorists and desiring the head of Osama and led to the PATRIOT act. Wikileaks attack is actually better in that it doesn't require any American deaths or a big physical mess.

Now, this year a new "internet censorship" law has been proposed. I refer you to this link for complete details. www.rollingout.com...

But in short the law is S.3804 or the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA).

So, I expect this WikiLeaks release to be the foundation of the argument FOR this new act and others like it. Also, this Wikileak will be the catalysts that "riles up" most Americans meaning an easy passage through the house and senate, with exception to Ron Paul of course.

I'm curious what you all think and I apologize if someone else posted this

Sorry, but you are another one living in cloud cuckoo land where you believe that the US can do what it wants, impose its will as it likes, anywhere in the world.

The US government could NOT have stopped the publishing of these documents. It happened in another country, which, let me remind you because it seems to have slipped your notice, is OUTSIDE of US jurisdiction.

The government doesn't need Assange to justify its censor of the internet. This (illogical) argument seems to be saying we mustn't use the internet to tell the truth, to expose criminals, because they those criminals will censor the internet. Therefore its best to say nothing about the crimes which are being committed.

The same argument would apply to the press/TV media - IF it weren't already censored.

You seem to be applying the same kind of logic as the Pentagon, who seems to be saying don't expose our crimes because that will put the criminals' henchmen at risk.

Yeah I know this happened outside of the US, but Americans using their home internet to access the info is here. The govt could stop that if they really felt threatened. Maybe the us govt has already got me to where I consider it very powerful, which I unfortunately do.

I don't know why you think Im using pentagon rationale, although I understand theirs, even though I don't believe they are worried at all about this putting soldiers at more risk.

Either way, I'm fine with what you think, but I'm not cuckoo, or would only be if they made me sit for a mental health exam. I think this leak is genuine, and we now have access to war documents we otherwise would not, but I do think the govt could block that site here in America. Our internet privileges are very soon going to change similar to the airways and FTC regulation.

Originally posted by BenIndaSun
Yeah I know this happened outside of the US, but Americans using their home internet to access the info is here. The govt could stop that if they really felt threatened. Maybe the us govt has already got me to where I consider it very powerful, which I unfortunately do.

I don't know why you think Im using pentagon rationale, although I understand theirs, even though I don't believe they are worried at all about this putting soldiers at more risk.

Either way, I'm fine with what you think, but I'm not cuckoo, or would only be if they made me sit for a mental health exam. I think this leak is genuine, and we now have access to war documents we otherwise would not, but I do think the govt could block that site here in America. Our internet privileges are very soon going to change similar to the airways and FTC regulation.

You know, I see where you are coming from but I do think you are attributing too much power to them. Yes, in theory they could shut down the internet to stop US citizens from accessing the information, but that would extremely drastic and would speak more of their guilt than anything else. I think there would still be legal restraints. They can't just shut down the internet on a whim.

I agree with you, they aren't at all worried about putting soldiers at more risk, they just don't like the truth coming out and their crimes being exposed. Damning though this recent info is, they are probably aware that much more damning info could be leaked, so they are going to milk the 'national security' aspect of this for all they are worth, lies and all, in an attempt to discredit Assange and get public opinion against him.

Earlier I listened to a David Icke video - and he was talking about this thing about how we tend to attribute a lot of power to them. His take on this is that this is what they want us to believe, but that in reality they aren't as powerful as we think they are....and numberwise they are a tiny few compared to how many of us there are.
I find this an interesting one, and have to keep reminding myself that in a sense they are only as powerful as we believe them to be.

Originally posted by BenIndaSun
Yeah I know this happened outside of the US, but Americans using their home internet to access the info is here. The govt could stop that if they really felt threatened. Maybe the us govt has already got me to where I consider it very powerful, which I unfortunately do.

I don't know why you think Im using pentagon rationale, although I understand theirs, even though I don't believe they are worried at all about this putting soldiers at more risk.

Either way, I'm fine with what you think, but I'm not cuckoo, or would only be if they made me sit for a mental health exam. I think this leak is genuine, and we now have access to war documents we otherwise would not, but I do think the govt could block that site here in America. Our internet privileges are very soon going to change similar to the airways and FTC regulation.

You know, I see where you are coming from but I do think you are attributing too much power to them. Yes, in theory they could shut down the internet to stop US citizens from accessing the information, but that would extremely drastic and would speak more of their guilt than anything else. I think there would still be legal restraints. They can't just shut down the internet on a whim.

I agree with you, they aren't at all worried about putting soldiers at more risk, they just don't like the truth coming out and their crimes being exposed. Damning though this recent info is, they are probably aware that much more damning info could be leaked, so they are going to milk the 'national security' aspect of this for all they are worth, lies and all, in an attempt to discredit Assange and get public opinion against him.

Earlier I listened to a David Icke video - and he was talking about this thing about how we tend to attribute a lot of power to them. His take on this is that this is what they want us to believe, but that in reality they aren't as powerful as we think they are....and numberwise they are a tiny few compared to how many of us there are.
I find this an interesting one, and have to keep reminding myself that in a sense they are only as powerful as we believe them to be.

reply to post by wcitizen


Interesting. I really wish I didn't think they were so powerful. I can't help but to imagine myself being the one blown up in that wikileaks video of the helicopter missile attack earlier this year (so David Icke may think they purposely released that to put me in my place and show me that they can annihilate me????....I can see that) . We out-number them, but they out-machine us. Speaking of machines, it is quite disturbing to read anti-Assange comments on news sites. I read things like putting a bullet in his head, sending a drone out to kill him, etc.

Anyways, I think those old power-freaks in dc just hate the types of websites that our out there and how much they would like to regulate it. If not for pure power, to shut opposition opinions that may keep them from being re-elected.