The Truth About WikiLeaks

Welcome my friends on ATS, this is my first Thread so I'm gonna make it a bit Interesting .
As we all know by now is that Wikileaks is the whistle blowing Website that shows corruption of Governments and their Politicians right ...... WRONG, it seems that Wikileaks couldn't have come at a better time for the US and Israel in their plan to change the World ( NWO ) .

northerntruthseeker.blogspot.com...

They said that the leaks would damage the relationship of the US with other countries but I beg to differ as life goes on unchanged except in the you guessed it the MIDDLE EAST amazing.

If you noticed that prior to the Tunisian Revolution there were no Leaks on the tunisian President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali , however Leaks were pouring down on him once the Revolution started which led to his removal

Same story for Libya , Leaks came after the mass crowds and military action of Ghaddafi's army ... But whu not prior to that ( the whole no-fly zone and military aid is suspicious by the way ---> OIL )

the same thing happened in Egypt, and is now happening in Syria , Yemen , Jordan and the rest of the Middle East except for ISRAEL that hasnt been affected by Wikileaks because there are non about her !!!

www.rense.com...

so People open your eyes and see the truth

9/11 was an Inside Job ... YOU KNOW WHO IM TALKING ABOUT
stop following ALIENS they aren't REAL
Chemtrails are Worrying
GMO must be Baneed
NWO definitely coming so be ready u can fight it

Peace all

reply to post by B4Truth

I bet you believed wikileaks was for the people before you read that article.

Think for yourself man!

In no way do i see wikileaks helping the US.

reply to post by goos3


No not Really , from the beginning I kept telling people about what I thought but some are just brainwashed to belive .
plus I am new to ATS and this is my 1st thread and I finally have proof some might accept it or not


by creating fake leaks about ghaddafi the US can invade Libya just like ( Iraq and WMD ) for u know what

Wikileaks definitely seems like a psy-op more and more. At first, I really wanted it to be legit and doing something good in revealing more of the truth about what goes on in our world but alas I've come to the conclusion that it is nothing more than a clever psy-op that, yes, seems to be leaving Israel out of the equation all together.

reply to post by B4Truth


Ah, Don't mind me.
I'm having one of those days.

It is possible.

reply to post by B4Truth


wikileaks, openleaks, 911truth, anonymous etc - these movements and their impact are HUGE and GROWING

the real trick is making you believe that you're alone, when you have the world behind you.

reply to post by B4Truth


welcome!

in my opinion wikileaks didn't start out as a tool of the NWO, actually the contrary. but now they elite are using our own tools against us via disinformation and fearmongering but fear not, the Bible tells us that the meek shall inherit the earth. a lot of world governments have been trying to regulate the internet for quite sometime now, but that has proved to be impossible as it is not one unit, one server, in one country, but instead millions spread throughout every country. the only way that the internet could be successfully shut down or regulated completely is for a specific region, that is unless there is a one world government -- that is the only way. also, aliens are so real that it's blatantly obvious now, check out the disclosure project.

reply to post by emptyOmind


I think ur right on the wikileaks thing
but regarding the aliens , there are no mention of them in the bible or anywhere and if they do exist , shouldnt they have appeared to us in their giant spaceships or something lol
but I think we should stay focused on things that are happening on our planet , lets worry about outer space later

I posted this on another thread a while back, but figured I would repost here because it goes right along with what the OP is saying:

I recently read an incredible book by a French theorist by the name of Jacques Ellul, titled Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes. Ellul in this book describes propaganda as an inevitable by-product of the way that our current, modern society - dubbed by him "the Technological Society." It is an all-pervasive force, inescapable, and one that is rarely understood. Propaganda's main intent is to generate action by creating a certain feeling, yet this relies on the implementation of "pre-propaganda." Furthermore, both pre-propaganda and propaganda itself need to, at some level, utilize facts that can be presented at either utmost accuracy or spun to give it a certain appearance. I can't help but apply this to WikiLeaks.

Is WikiLeaks the fact-based pre-propaganda, generating a certain zeitgeist, in preparation for propaganda itself to be utilized? For Ellul, the spinners of pre-propaganda is the major media, so given that the major media is the tool that disseminates WikiLeaks information into society at large, I can't help but suspect this is the case indeed.

I also came across an interesting article by the folks over at the Centre for Research on Globalization called "Who's Who at WikiLeaks" that raises some equally, and possibly interrelated, questions about the individuals on the board of advisers for WikiLeaks I'll post some quotes:

[Note: the National Endowment for Democracy is a State Department-funded vehicle for "democracy promotion" - i.e., getting countries in line with the Washington Consensus. It does this by funneling US money into the hands of grassroots organizations around the globe, and frequently works hand in hand with George Soros' Open Society Institute. Read about it. Its scary.]

Philip Adams, among other things, “held key posts in Australian governmental media administration” (Wikileaks' Avisory Board, Wikileaks.org, 27 March 2008), chaired the Australia Council and contributed to The Times, The Financial Times in London and The New York Times. Confirmed by several reports, he is the representative of the International Committee of Index on Censorship. It is worth mentioning that Wikileaks was awarded the 2008 Economist Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression award. (Philip Adams, Milesago.com)

Adams worked as a presenter for ABC (Australia) Radio's Late Night Live and as columnist for The Australian since the 1960s. The Australian is owned by News Corporation, a property of Rupert Murdoch, member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Ben Laurie:

...

Despite his denial of being an advisor to Wikileaks, his name still appears on the list of advisory board members, according to reports. It is also worth noting that Ben Laurie is a “Director of Security for The Bunker Secure Hosting, where he has worked since 1984 and is responsible for security, cryptography and network design.” He is also a Director of Open Rights Group, funded by the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust Ltd and the Open Society Foundation.

Xiao Qiang:

...and is currently vice-chair of the Steering Committee of the World Movement for Democracy”...

Xiao Qiang is also the "founder and publisher of China Digital Times" (Biographies, National Endowment for Democracy), which is a grantee of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) (Directives from China's Ministry of Truth on Liu Xiaobo winning Nobel, Democracy Digest, October 8, 2010).

The Steering Committee of the World Movement for Democracy is an initiative of the Washington, DC-based NED. (World Movement for Democracy). In 2008, Xiao Qiang was part of a discussion panel intitled "Law Rights and Democracy in China: Perspectives and Leading Advocates", held by NED before the Democracy Award Ceremony. (2008 NED Democracy Award Honors Heroes of Human Rights and Democracy in China, National Endowment for Democracy, June 17, 2008).

Wang Dan:

He is chairman of the Chinese Constitutional Reform Association, and sits on the editorial board of Beijing Spring, a magazine funded by NED, the “chief democracy-promoting foundation” according to an article by Judith Miller in The New York Times. One of the founders of NED was quoted as saying “A lot of what we [NED] do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.” (quoted in William Blum, Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower, 2000, p. 180).

In 1998, Wang Dan was granted the NED's Democracy Award "for representing a peaceful alternative to achieve democracy and for [his] courage and steadfastness in the cause of democracy". (1998 Democracy Award honors Heroes of Human Rights and Democracy in China, National Endowment for Democracy)

A lot of ties there to the National Endowment for Democracy. The authors of the article raise a few more valid points:

Assange encourages blind faith in Wikileaks as he puts a lot of emphasis on the trustworthiness of his opaque organization. In the words of Assange:

“Once something starts going around and being considered trustworthy in a particular arena, and you meet someone and they say ‘I heard this is trustworthy,’ then all of a sudden it reconfirms your suspicion that the thing is trustworthy. So that’s why brand is so important, just as it is with anything you have to trust.”(Andy Greenberg, An Interview with Wikileaks' Julian Assange, Forbes, 29 October, 2010, emphasis added)

"People should understand that WikiLeaks has proven to be arguably the most trustworthy new source that exists, because we publish primary source material and analysis based on that primary source material," Assange told CNN. "Other organizations, with some exceptions, simply are not trustworthy."(The secret life of Julian Assange, CNN, 2 December 2010, emphasis added)

While Wikileaks no longer discloses the names of the members of its advisory board, nor does it reveal its sources of funding, we have to trust it because according to its founder Julian Assange, it “has proven to be the most trustworthy news source that exists”.

Moreover, if we follow Assange’s assertion that there are only a few media organizations which can be considered trustworthy, we must assume that those are the ones which were selected by Wikileaks to act as "partners" in the release and editing of the leaks, including The New York Times, Der Spiegel, The Guardian, El Paìs, Le Monde.

Yet The New York Times, which employs members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) including Wikileaks’ collaborator David E. Sanger, has proven more than once to be a propaganda tool for the US government, the most infamous example being the Iraqi WMD narrative promoted by Pulitzer Prize winner Judith Miller.

Over the last seven months, the London based Frontline Club has served as de facto U.K "headquarters" for Wikileaks. The Frontline Club is an initiative of Henry Vaughan Lockhart Smith, a former British Grenadier Guards captain. According to NATO, Vaughan Smith became an "independant video journalist [...] who always hated war, but remained [...] soldier-friendly". (Across the Wire, New media: Weapons of mass communication, NATO Review, February 2008)

Upon his release from bail, Julian Assange was provided refuge at Vaughan Smith's Ellingham Manor in Norfolk.

The Frontline Club is an establishment media outfit. Vaughan Smith writes for the NATO Review. (See NATO Web TV Channel and NATO Nations: Accurate, Reliable and Convenient). His relationship to NATO goes back to 1998 when he worked as a video journalist in Kosovo. In 2010, he was "embedded with a platoon from the British Grenadier Guards" during Operation Moshtarak in Afghanistan's Helmand Province. (PBS NewsHour, February 19, 2010). According to the New York Times, The Frontline Club "has received financing for its events from the Open Society Institute". (In London, a Haven and a Forum for War Reporters - New York Times, 28 August 2006)

Food for thought, no?