A New Way To Leak UFO (dis)Info?
What revelations and evils await us with the forthcoming debut of “wikileaks?”
Here is the hype from the placemarker website:
Wikileaks is developing an uncensorable Wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis. Our primary interests are oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to those in the west who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their own governments and corporations. We aim for maximum political impact; this means our interface is identical to Wikipedia and usable by non-technical people. We have received over 1.2 million documents so far from dissident communities and anonymous sources.
What remains to be seen is if wikileaks will become a forum for all manner of disinfo, designed not to inform, but lead astray the public and enemies of the anonymous person or organization doing the leaking. Anyone with access to sensitive information will still be able to cloak their activities with behind a wall of real information and checkable facts, in spite of pronouncements to the contrary:
Peddlers of misinformation will find themselves undone by Wikileaks, equipped as it is to scrutinize leaked documents in a way that no mainstream media outlet is capable of.
The site is due to make its debut in the next two months. Perhaps some documents related to the release of a new book on the Bennewitz/ UFO disinfo shenanigans of the late 1970s and early ’80s will appear on wikileaks as “companion” documents. We should of course await developments with a skeptical attitude.
This entry was posted
on Sunday, January 28th, 2007 at 3:49 pm and is filed under Wake Up Down There, Government Projects, Conspiracies. You can follow responses via RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is not allowed.
del.icio.us Digg Reddit Ma.gnolia Technorati Help
- Related News Stories:
- No related posts »
|
Jan 28 2007 
January 28th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
Greg, while I’m not expecting anything from this new site, I’m not bothered by it either. I don’t care at all. Seems some are very bothered by it; in an uproar. Maybe I’m missing something, I don’t know.
BTW, I’m enjoying your book very much! I’m about a third of the way through. very interesting.
January 28th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
I think the concept is wonderful, but it’s also probably a hopeless venture. The site claims it will be “uncensorable”, but I would bet serious money that if it strikes the wrong nerve with the wrong group(s) it will be removed from the web. It isn’t difficult to take down a server, or compel those who own the server to discontinue hosting to a particular group.
So while the concept is laudable, the impact will probably amount to little or none.
January 29th, 2007 at 1:41 am
Regan,
I don’t know what will happen with this new site. I prefer to sit back and look. Those with entrenched agendas will be the most emotional. Funny stuff.
Glad you’re enjoying the book (”Project Beta,” right?) Some have accused me of not taking the military to task enough for driving poor Paul Bennewitz crazy. That’s up to the reader using the balanced (I hope) info I provided. Please tell me what you think when you’re finished.
January 29th, 2007 at 1:47 am
Raven,
I don’t know. There is some merit to Lyndon Johnson’s quote about “Let’s make them deny it” i.e., if the offended party reacts, it’s just fuel for the fire. Also, the offended party may just spin the info on wikileaks with their own “leak” so that people don’t know what to think (or to think exactly what they are told.) All you have to do is pander to people’s preconceived notions or “common wisdom” about a subject to get them on your side.
January 29th, 2007 at 2:37 am
It’s one of those things which could go either way: a damp squib - or an atomic bomb.
Most of what’ll appear, especially initially, will probably be only of interest to a few, even if the material is genuine.
I mean, to some, it might seem trivial to point out that ‘Greg Bishop’ is really a Mr. Potato Head style photo of Nick Redfern crudely sketched over with iron filings, but ask yourself why the Dark One would choose to give his ‘altar’ ego the surname of a church prelate? Add to which, it’s a scientific fact that ‘Greg’ probably means something like, “I am Satan’s Son”, (in, er, Transylvanian, or one of them languages no one knows, or has ever heard of - probably), and then you might begin to see why it’s not so trivial after all.
But until we start getting hard hitting ‘real life’ apocalyptic style exposes like my Redfern one, Wikileaks is more likely to be a forum for hoaxers to take a leak on the minds of those with easily overheated imaginations.
Or don’t you agree - ‘Greg’?
January 29th, 2007 at 6:17 am
[…] From ufomystic.com: What revelations and evils await us with the forthcoming debut of “wikileaks?†[…]
January 29th, 2007 at 10:41 am
“alanborky” (if that IS your name),
Of course you know if you continue with this line of reasoning, you’ll be receiving a visit from our agents.
January 29th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
Alan Borky is actually an Illuminati-funded, Trilateralist deep-cover agent, working in tandem with Mossad and personnel from MJ12 who have “gone rogue” and who is working for “them.”
Your cover is blown “Alan.” Indeed, that slow, ominous knock at your front-door from the MIBs could appear anytime now…
“Trust no one,” as some TV show or other used to advise us.
January 29th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Where’s Jack Bauer when you need him?
January 29th, 2007 at 8:36 pm
hey, if it gets any deeper in this thread I will have to trade my galoshes for hip waders. . .
Wiki leaks sounds like a great college sociology project and that’s about it. With no way to verify the source, data becomes useless. Of course there is no such things as “untraceable”
Jess
… now where is my tinfoil hat and my copy of the pnakotic manuscript?
January 30th, 2007 at 2:16 am
So, the consensus seems to be thumbs down. I try to be balanced, but I too, have little hope for this. Judging by the silence about the subject on the UFO lists, the community does as well.
January 30th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
“Some have accused me of not taking the military to task enough for driving poor Paul Bennewitz crazy. “
Greg, I haven’t finished yet, but it seems that it would depend on your intent. Was the intent to give us the history/facts, or was it to expose/attack the military?
I assume you were giving us a historical context; the opinions of what did what to whom, and why, (like Doty, Moore, not to mention the military, and for that matter, Bennewitz’s actions, desires) are for the reader to decide.
That’s my two cents. As I say, I’m enjoying it very much, but haven’t finished. (Just now at the part where Bennewitz thinks he’s getting signals that make sense in his apartment filled with electronics; what an image!)
January 31st, 2007 at 12:20 am
Regan,
Your guess is correct. My intent was to report as objectively as I thought I could, not to moralize. That’s up to the reader. Enjoy the book!