Customize

Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

Discussion in 'Wikileaks' started by exOT8Michael, Dec 6, 2010.

  1. exOT8Michael Member

    Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    I was looking at reports on CNN that Wikileaks is now being labeled this, that and the other in order to try to destroy its credibility and its very existence.

    These labels do not stick on well, though, as smoke screens and slick propaganda are a very poor adhesive.

    Even this thing about it now being labeled a "terrorist group", is a poor tactic.

    Back in 2001, after 9/11 I took a deep and direct look at what would be the main traits of a terrorist group, and came up with 75 major points by which they can be recognized.
    I used media, Google, and direct experience with Scientology's own terrorism tactics to establish the LIST.

    The LIST got webbed here:

    Michael Pattinson: "Terrorism: The 21st Century Battlefield"

    and in addition to showing what would REALLY be a terrorist group, it also provides a good basis for demonstrating the falsity of a "terrorist" label being affixed to the wrong type of target, and would actually help to show their innocence of such charges in the media or Justice system.

    How do YOU think Wikileaks stacks up against list? I will refrain from a broad opinion, as I originated this list. i would like to see the opinions of others, however.

    Desperate tyrants get their PR lackeys to shout loud and often against the actions of perceived enemies. Most often they have bigger things to hide than their "enemy targets".

    Truth, transparency and integrity are valuable in any culture.
    Lies and cover-ups are a form of oppression in themselves.
  2. Ann O'Nymous Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    Interesting list.
  3. JohnnyRUClear Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    "But enough about my list; let's talk about you. What do YOU think about my list?"
  4. Anonymous Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    Wrong tab, this isn't facebook.
  5. AnonyVix Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    Your list contains many traits of a traditional damaging cult not unlike the cult of scientology. While there is plenty of evidence to say such cults are in their own right terrorist groups not all terrorist groups are cults, though I dare say many are.

    Terrorist groups are defined by their use of terror tactics to further their own agenda. They are also defined by those who perceive them because the old adage "one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter" is true.

    That said I would qualify this by saying that freedom fighters should only use terror tactics in an environment where other forms of putting forward other ideas and promoting change are oppressed.

    Terror tactics are further defined as tactics that are intended to or can reasonably be seen to promote fear of harm or loss of life or liberty amongst the general population.

    For political reasons, since all terrorist groups have a political agenda and their target is always a state one has to add that terror tactics are also tactics that are aimed at forcing the state to conform to an agenda.

    Terror tactics would therefore be defined as:

    tactics intended to or can reasonably seen to promote fear of harm, or loss of life or liberty amongst the general population which in turn are acts of violence and aggression against the state with the intent of forcing the state to conform to the agenda of the group.

    So a random serial killer is not a terrorist though (s)he promotes terror in the population.

    Likewise the state cannot be a terrorist organisation because although neo-conservatism works through instilling fear in to the population it's agenda is state control.

    Wikileaks does not fit a terrorist organisation because while one might argue an agenda and an intent to force the state to conform the methods are none violent, though one could argue they are aggressive. Also, I don't believe that Wikileaks intends to promote fear amongst the general population and I don't believe what they are doing can reasonably be seen to promote fear of harm or loss of life or liberty amongst the general population.
  6. Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    They just caught Assange. Bummer.
  7. WhiteNight Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    Didn't catch him. He surrendered. He met them voluntarily. Such bullshit. All of this. It's such a blatant political move toget him out of the way for the US I don't know how this Swedish prosecutor lives with himself.
  8. Resolution Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    Agreed.

    As a side note, I'm a graphic designer. Are there any ways I can help Anonymous? Graphically speaking?

    (Im new here)
  9. Anonymous Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    Mike I love ya, but I think that list might have been designed to include cults (including Al Qaeda) I will agree that some cults breed terrorists but not all terrorists are in cults, and not all cults are terrorist cults.

    I am not a big fan of Assange, but I would classify him as more of a prick (and possibly a rapist trying to cover his ass) than a terrorist. I don't think it was needed or even polite to publish lists of soft targets such as medical facilities that could greatly compromise people in the US and cut off or hinder the supply of medicine to diabetics for example. But he probably has a right to do that, I don't know if he has the right to publish it from someone else's resources. Terrorists might want to know that information but it does not necessarily make the person giving it to them anything more than a prick.

    Terrorist is a word that has lots of meanings to a lot of different people. I didn't see "acts violently outside any set of standard of guidelines", or" acts without warning" on your list describing terrorists.
  10. xenubarb Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    You like this.
  11. Anonymous Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    I think that this list applies to most governments, many corporations, many "religious" movements, Scientology, Anonymous, especially intel agencies, etc. Do you know why, Michael? It's because the one thing Hubbard was right about (sorta) was SP's aka Sociopathic personalities. LRH was one. Much of the driving force of Scientology is sociopathic and LRH tried to create a psychopath factory obedient to him. This is also the primary objective of every single military training academy. The driving force of Chanology in its inception and early days was also this personality type. Most of the world's history is sociopathic personalities warring with each other for whatever reason and catching the main population in the crossfire/manipulating the population into serving our agendas. There is no society on earth I can think of that has ever been immune to this.

    I like your list a lot, but seriously, compare the checklist to a psychopathic personality checklist, and then compare that to virtually any large societal group.
  12. Anonymous Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    I would also like to point out that yes, I am fully above the cult's law. The only law I am not above are those whose coercion and violence I cannot escape at the time. As an American, I consider many of my countries laws to hold no more merit than Co$' ethics and KRs. The only reason I pretend to care is because I am still inside the cult of America and thus must pretend to care that Assange is a rapist terrorist, that people growing a little hemp are drug addict monsters, that fresh faced college kids and their grandmas should be sued and have their homes taken away for downloading a washed up has-been's music, etc. It doesn't mean America's ethics have anything more than a passing facade of morality, it just means I cannot fight the sociopathic system fully at this time. But if I managed to get a passport and emigrated to Denmark, then yes I am above the U.S.' laws and can smoke pot with hookers.

    Get it? We are all above the laws made by sociopaths. Their rules do not apply to us. We're simply forced to avoid their brainwashed minions for the time being.
  13. exOT8Michael Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    Some great points of view in this thread, thanks.

    When I made this list there was not much of anyone to bounce it off as such a forum as this did not exist. It is a kind of "raw" list.

    Maybe we can refine and expand/edit this list to make it more useful, stronger and a tool to serve freedom against destructive fanaticism or tyranny?

    It is ironic that Scientology provided a lot of the examples of traits that are in the list, as its propaganda goes in the opposite direction to its reality.
  14. exOT8Michael Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    So, are you saying the cult type of terrorist mentality or sociopathic mindset has been more generally integrated into capitalistic and political systems? if so, that is quite a problem!
  15. thevoxbox Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    In terms of large organizations, such as governments or corporations, there isn't exactly a built in conscience. This is easily explained because... they aren't people. Conscience is a thoroughly human, individual thing. A bureaucrat may feel guilt; the bureaucracy cannot. I don't think it's entirely fair or all that logical to extend the definition of sociopath to a construct that exists completely devoid of emotion and individuality, because really, only people can be sociopaths, far as current psychological definitions go.
  16. Anonymous Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    Herself. And perhaps the Sweedish prosecutor thinks she has a good case and wants to take it to trial. But that's not fun and it doesn't let us put Assange up on the cross now does it?
  17. Anonymous Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    ...and it continues:

    On this morning's Today Show, in a report on Time's man of the year, Assange was referred to as "an online outlaw exposing the secrets of the world" by corporate media hack Matt Lauer, thereby admitting that exposing secrets makes you an outlaw.
  18. Anonymous Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    Can I admitt on your behalf that you are an idiot?
  19. Anonymous Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    So says the cretin who can't spell admit.
    Get A Brain Morans - Funny Picture
  20. another123 Member

    Re: Wikileaks: These "fair game" labels don't stick on well.

    Seems there are those that agree with you:
    Wikileaks Attackers Motivated and Rational say Cybercrime Experts

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins