Rothschild/freemason ploy to bring about global destabilisation.

why would they want that?

They believe in order out of chaos. They create chaos and out of the chaos will come new world government.

The Patriot Act came out of 911. The UN came out of World War II. The enabling act came out of the Reichstag fire... it is simply the way these things are done.

ah yeah. Makes sense...I was thinking you were meaning for positive reasons

You're comparing Wikileaks to world wars and terrorist attacks, which sounds particularly idiotic.

have you not seen the arab revolutions incited by wikileaks? or are you just ignorant?

incited by wikileaks?

Is there any actual evidence that these revolutions were incited by WikiLeaks?

yes

Could you at least give me a link to a story which displays such evidence?

All I've seen is supposition.

Hey, hold on. I didn't mean that Wikileaks are creating the chaos; I was talking about the Rothschild/Freemasons mentioned in a previous comment... it was a response to a response. Sorry for the confusion. Of course Wikileaks is not a terrorist organization. I just don't trust them... just like I don't trust CNN or MSNBC - they are all playing their small part in the unfolding conspiracy...

who are you referring to?

Sham. I wasn't sure for awhile but then there was Assange, out in public etc. as opposed to say, not trying to become a target. Also, the minute they started in with 'Al Qaeda', that was it for me. Plus the fact that with all of these 'leaks' nothing substantial has changed, if at all.

Wikileaks was the bee's knees here for a while. Then they released stuff that wasn't what some in /r/conspiracy wanted to hear.

Reports of Iran training iraqi insurgents. Less civilian casualties than most people thought in Iraq. It was about that time wikileaks support did a 180.

Assange came out against 911 conspiracy theories; which illustrated the fact that he has an agenda (whether you agree with the agenda or not). At that point I personally started to become suspicious.

Then I realized that nothing he was releasing was actually going to do much. Ostensibly it seems like a great idea, but these guys are censoring their own leaks, and releasing them to mainstream media before going public. Plus he got famous so quickly which is always a red flag. I still support the concept, but I gave up on hoping that wikileaks was going to change things early on. Was I right? Of course I was right. Do I get any credit? No. Do I expect any credit? No. Does this change anything? No. Will I get downvoted? Who gives a shit?

Why dont the people of this subreddit want to hear that? I think what people want here is the truth, nothing more, nothing less.

To a lot of people in this subreddit, the truth isn't the truth unless it is what they want to hear.

i didnt realise that you had done extensive research and polls on each and every individual of this subreddit.

You don't need polls or extensive research to know when people lean on their crutches.

they released stuff that wasn't what some in /r/conspiracy wanted to hear.

I would expect that most people in /r/conspiracy actually want to hear the truth, whatever form that takes.

Hearing the truth and admitting something is the truth are two different things. If it's not what someone wants to hear, they can apply a multitude of labels.

• They're lying

• They've been told to lie.

• They've been paid off

• They've been brain washed

• They're only saying it, because it's what the government told them

Or the old standby. The government <insert something> 40 years ago, that means they did it today too.

Or the old standby. The government <insert something> 40 years ago, that means they did it today too.

You're getting it wrong.

The government did something 40 years ago, that means they are capable of doing it today, too

You can't argue with that.

Wikileaks confirmed a whole lot of suppositions, and gave us an amazing insight into the reasoning used by some minor functionaries in the US diplomatic system.

Wikileaks hasn't released anything much with extremely high levels of secrecy, so there's still a whole lot of good stuff which we might never see.

Wikileaks is good but ordinary people don't have time to filter through all the raw information. Wikileaks should employ journalists to write summaries of the files they release

Wikileaks is a disinfo/propaganda tool.

Hey, completely agree with you :)

Nice name, very smexy

You're comparing Wikileaks to world wars and terrorist attacks, which sounds particularly idiotic.

ah yeah. Makes sense...I was thinking you were meaning for positive reasons