Last edited Tue Nov 27, 2012, 07:41 PM - Edit history (1)
I'm guessing Manning is confined to using the attorneys paid for by the government. It's not a civilian case, so more money might not have helped. It might have been better if Wikileaks used more of their influence or wealth to help him. The focus on Assange detracted from that.
Answer me this, hasn't JA said that Wikileaks is 'his' creation, that it belongs to him? Could anyone be that cynical as to use the public desire to know things, just for personal gain?
I'll rephrase that. Cynicism is considered clever, but it's as blind as faith at times. Is anyone smart enough to pull off a scheme to make millions and not be called on it?
All protestations of higher purpose, such as we have seen from the religious right, conservative wingnuts and CT pundits, end up being large scams based on manipulating emotions. Like Beck's gold scam and Jones' disaster food, and politicians like Newt, who apparently needed yhe money. There is a huge profit in getting people upset, scared or angry.
We can't forget the Koch brothers invested $400 million in their scams to get Obama out of office. They paid shills to spout BS to get people worked up. Did they believe any of it?
I don't know, but we know that they expected a bigger profit, more control of governments, resources, etc. And they are getting it where their candidates won elections. We can see the payback for buying public office in operation.
What does the Wikileaks organization, or JA if he 'owns' it, get out of this other than $150G a day, more than most Americans or citizens of the world, will ever see in years, much less a day. Was this about money, or as some CT pundits say, just a scam to manufacture consent for more government control of the net?
Honestly, this stuff is way out of my league. Pretty elevated circles here, like the 1%. Think of the lives that could be saved with that money, elections that could be financed, unless we call the slamming of Obama the purpose of this.
What a world.