People on both sides of the argument have been quick to rush to judgement on the motivations of Wikileaks' Julian Assange. Moral crusader or compromised egotist? In a new book about Assange written by the Guardian journalists with whom he worked closely, Assange is quoted as saying that negative cables concerning the United States and Israel were deliberately omitted from initial Wikileaks releases last year to prevent the organization being stereotyped as anti-American.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEQA_ev0zbc
"We shouldn't go exposing, for example Israel, during the initial phase....the exposure of these other bad countries (Russia, Arab countries) will set the tone of American public opinion," Assange is quoted as saying in the book
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j62ugvwYuv8
Wikileaks was always a psyop program from day one. John Young knew that as they were creating it, that’s why he got out and published the emails, so that people would not be suckered in by it.http://www.infowars.com/how-the-globalist%E2%80%99s-pr-agents-use-the-wikileaks-psyops-program/
His obsession with secrecy, both in others and maintaining his own, lends him the air of a conspiracy theorist. Is he one? "I believe in facts about conspiracies," he says, choosing his words slowly. "Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It's important not to confuse these two. Generally, when there's enough facts about a conspiracy we simply call this news." What about 9/11? "I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud." What about the Bilderberg conference? "That is vaguely conspiratorial, in a networking sense. We have published their meeting notes."Kts. myös: http://yksikolmeseiska.blogspot.com/2011/09/sensuroimaton-wikileaks-vuoto-voi.html
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti