You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: TOP SECRET Technique for Searching Bulk Images on WikiLeaks
Plus it seems rather contradictory to post something that helps you search WL yet you say they are likely controlled opposition. I hope you can see this.
Yes maybe I should've worded that differently. My personal belief is that WikiLeaks is controlled opposition (mainly because their lack of "leaks" about 9/11). But besides making a statement like that, I don't usually go much further into it.
But controlled or not, they have some info worth looking at, and my image search tip is pretty helpful.
Do you have inside knowledge of what information they are withholding? Because you surely you would need to have that to quantify this:
Nice nit-picking my quote out of context... My belief that WikiLeaks hasn't released any damning info about 9/11 doesn't require "inside knowledge". And Assange being quoted as saying 9/11 was a false conspiracy doesn't help his credibility either.
I'm not nit-picking. I'm working with what you provide me.
How do you know they have info on 9/11? I believe 9/11 was an inside job but I couldn't give anyone conclusive proof it was.
With much respect I hope you take a look into the time and context of that particular quote, properly. I'm not here to argue with you and I'm happy to explain why you are wrong if you are willing to listen. I've noticed one common thing with everyone who believes this Assange/psyop theory, you are all youtubers. Makes you think doesn't it.
Yes you are nit-picking, and until now ignoring the main argument: 9/11.
The towers turning to dust in mid-air is conclusive proof of the 9/11 conspiracy. (http://DrJudyWood.com)
Stop taking my quotes out of context and making straw man arguments. I'm not saying WikiLeaks "have" 9/11 info, but that I "believe" they should be posting about it (instead of Assange stating it is a "false conspiracy) if they want to help their credibility.
But regardless, you are arguing about my "belief". Why can't you accept people have different views than yourself? Makes you think...
PS: Post your "argument" on "YouTube" if you feel so confident.
I don't have an argument. You do. I need to prove nothing.
I hope we can communicate with each other on another subject we both agree on one day. I have no beef with you. I just felt you were being ironic, contradictory and a little 2 faced when you decided to post this post. I hope you can see my point of view.
.... I seriously have no idea what your end-game is. Why are you being so 2-faced?
WikiLeaks has info worth looking at hence I'm promoting the image search tool. But at the same time I believe they are controlled opposition hence the disclaimer. Still confused?
That's like saying you'd still want to be in a relationship with your wife after you found out she was and is cheating on you.