11–20 of 122 posts
If they really have something that important, why would they drum up attention and wait like sitting ducks, instead of publishing it ASAP?
If they really have something that important, why would they drum up attention and wait like sitting ducks, instead of publishing it ASAP?
But this current stream of tweets is a bit dramatic. If it's just some random infrared kill shot like that old Apache hit ( http://www.globalresearch.ca/audiovideo/apachehit.mpg ), then it'll hurt Wikileaks' credibility to some degree.
If they really have something that important, why would they drum up attention and wait like sitting ducks, instead of publishing it ASAP?
Possibly to draw more attention and support. They've been having funding issues lately; they might think this is a good way to get out from under that. Of course, it'll backfire if this turns out to be insignificant, a la the recent documents that they claimed were evidence of the U.S. trying to "shut them down".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Possibly to draw more attention and support. They've been having funding issues lately; they might think this is a good way to get out from under that. Of course, it'll backfire if this turns out to be insignificant, a la the recent documents that they claimed were evidence of the U.S. trying to "shut them down".
I'd feel a lot more inclined to donate if they were clearer about where the money went and why they need so much for what amounts to a moderated and anonymized public file share.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Two reasons: First, the "confession" -- whosever they are trying to elicit -- has more value if given out of paranoia. Think about it this way: you have a brief glimpse into something wrong that happened, but you don't know the full story. Let's say you know 10% of the full story. If you come forward with the evidence, the accused party need only acknowledge or refute the 10% that you've divulged. However if you make…
Still, I think the idea of a small amateur (as far as spycraft is concerned) organization pressuring the DoD like this is insane. They're risking their own wellbeing.
For a good cause, that is. One that benefits us all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Two reasons: First, the "confession" -- whosever they are trying to elicit -- has more value if given out of paranoia. Think about it this way: you have a brief glimpse into something wrong that happened, but you don't know the full story. Let's say you know 10% of the full story. If you come forward with the evidence, the accused party need only acknowledge or refute the 10% that you've divulged. However if you make…
Still, I think the idea of a small amateur (as far as spycraft is concerned) organization pressuring the DoD like this is insane. They're risking their own wellbeing.
(unless of course your suggesting we should believe everything posted on Twitter as gospel without verification.........)
Call me a cynic but this is based on just the Twitter feed. Let's not get too excited till something more concrete appears. (unless of course your suggesting we should believe everything posted on Twitter as gospel without verification.........)
Call me a cynic but this is based on just the Twitter feed. Let's not get too excited till something more concrete appears. (unless of course your suggesting we should believe everything posted on Twitter as gospel without verification.........)