[Closed] How many conspiracy theories has wikileaks proven were true?

The point of a conspiracy theory is that it can never be proven to be true.

But wikileaks was set up by the CIA to stop the real truth ever getting out.

Close Ian, it was setup to tell the truth but made to look like it's done by tin foil hat wearers so no one will believe it.

The point of a conspiracy theory is that it can never be proven to be true [i]or False[/i]

FIFY

Real "truth seekers" don't like wiki leaks as it doesn't agree with their tin foil hat conspiracy theories.

http://www.infowars.com/wikileaks-end-your-war-on-911-truth/

5 but i cannot tell you which ones as they monitor everything

42, surely.

Ian, I doubt your comment will be bettered today!

The point of a conspiracy theory is that it can never be proven to be true or false.

So it's a religion then. Religion for atheists.
I see now. That's why this Assange bloke is worshipped by so many, err, believers.

But wikileaks was set up by the CIA to stop the real truth ever getting out.

Classic - Assange is a double agent! 😀

[img] [/img]

Use your own powers of judgement.

Are there really any conspiracies happening, why would anyone want to control the world or the resources of our species / planet, when there isn't any benefit to doing so?

Saying that it has just occurred to me that it would be a lot easier to collect resources on a world if you got a bunch of dumb creatures who inhabited that world to do it for you, then paid them a miniscule percentage of those resources.

Aah a plan is forming in my devious mind, D'oh! too late, it's already been done.

there are of course countless conspiracy theories and these theories are all from tinfoil wearing idiots.

You owe me a new ironyometer, my old one just exploded.

Yes cougar tinfoil wearing idiots, because it is complete lunacy to suggest that we cannot trust the governments of the world or the security services that direct them through advisory roles.

It's not as though on the advice of the security services some of the greatest crimes against humanity in the history of our race, have in fact been committed, now is it?

I think a healthy dose of scepticism is important, sure.

Which crimes are you referring to?

30 years from now, when it transpires that Assange was nothing but a smug faced chicken s**t trouble making sex pest who runs and hides in the embassy of a back water south american country which happens to have a nice climate and good beaches rather than front up for what he 'believes' in, causing a diplomatic incident that eventually decends into all our war, we can all look back and laugh at all this 'did he actually do any good with his web site' issue. I feel sorry for the poor intel grunt who he wooed into passing all this info and is currently being held in solitary, possibly being mentally tortured in his name.

Of course I could be wrong.

[img] [/img]

How about we focus on crimes that can be identified or prove, like those exposed by wikileaks and then ask, has anyone responsible for these crimes been prosecuted or held accountable?

It's easy to go on about tinfoil hats and this that and the next thing, however as we speak British and American forces under the guidance of the security services are involved in military operations all over the world.

Why are we or at the very least an independent council not allowed to evaluate all relevant data on these operations and decide for ourselves if our country should be involved.

We have seen that a great failure to uphold the very laws that we claim gives us the right to interfere with the governance of other countries has occurred and yet no measures are being implemented to ensure it does not happen again.

Anyone saying that there are no conspiracies and that our governments and security services are not involved in covert and very often illegal activities, has not been paying attention to the history of the west!

Ha! ^ this but he skinned the at and wears it on his head now.
EDIT, not quick enough, obviously commenting on the Blowfeld pic.

30 years from now, when it transpires that Assange was nothing but a smug faced chicken s**t trouble making sex pest who runs and hides in the embassy of a back water south american country which happens to have a nice climate and good beaches rather than front up for what he 'believes' in, causing a diplomatic incident that eventually decends into all our war, we can all look back and laugh at all this 'did he actually do any good with his web site' issue.

kaesae - Member

Saying that it has just occurred to me that it would be a lot easier to collect resources on a world if you got a bunch of dumb creatures who inhabited that world to do it for you, then paid them a miniscule percentage of those resources.

Congrats, you just invented capitalism!

spchantler - No not at all. I believe that exposing the behaviour of such governments is right and proper. I also believe, given the information that is made public, that the case against him in Sweden is somewhat fishy and almost too convenient. I was only trying to offer a flipant antidote. However, is not honouring his inside man and what he stands for by hiding behind a south american government. I did have a lot of respect for what he stood for. Recents events have led that respect to wane somewhat.
My earlier post was a thought that popped into me head a couple of days ago.
Of course, it could have been wrong.

Why are we or at the very least an independent council not allowed to evaluate all relevant data on these operations and decide for ourselves if our country should be involved.

We have this already - they go by the name of "the government".

Wiki-leaks has fallen on its arse because it's not revealed any major government cover-ups or lies, despite threatening to do so.
A point of comparison would be Daniel Ellsberg and [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers ]the Pentagon papers[/url] in the 70s. He was a whistleblower who leaked documents to the NY times showing the real extent of US involvement in SE Asia - totally rocked American society at how deep they were into Vietnam and had been for years; it was a major contributing factor to ending the war. The information Wiki-leaks has put out there isn't in the same solar system in terms of impact or exposing systematic government lies.

IanMunro's comment is basically spot on (similar gags were made about MI6 and Arthur Scargill and Derek Hatton). If you wanted to discredit an organisation / movement then you couldn't do much better than coming up with wiki-leaks and Julian Assange.

Are there really any conspiracies happening

Yes.

Are they mundane and political in origin, leading to diplomatic cock ups and occasionally war after a few decades rather than covering up aliens or something really big?

Yes.

Why are we or at the very least an independent council not allowed to evaluate all relevant data on these operations and decide for ourselves if our country should be involved.

Freedom!

To do what we are told, modern life, so good, that it's shit!