Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
9. I would think so, too. Is this really all about the money, like a marketing scheme?
Tue Nov 27, 2012, 05:51 PM
Nov 2012

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.


Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Credit card blockade of WikiLeaks donations likely to be legal, EU says struggle4progress Nov 2012 #1
Credit ban 'wiped out WikiLeaks' struggle4progress Nov 2012 #2
It would be a hundred times bigger if he hadn't published national security documents. randome Nov 2012 #3
The bail Jumper wants a probe? nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #4
Credit card block on WikiLeaks "unlikely" to have violated EU rules struggle4progress Nov 2012 #5
$50 million? $50 million? Who do you think you are, Kelsey Grammar? Chelsea Clinton? freshwest Nov 2012 #6
JA says $150K was coming in daily before the credit card companies pulled the plug struggle4progress Nov 2012 #7
I would think so, too. Is this really all about the money, like a marketing scheme? freshwest Nov 2012 #9
No--Manning chose to have a civilian attorney, who is paid for by a legal fees trust created to msanthrope Nov 2012 #11
Thanks! I didn't know about this group, close to a million. From the page: freshwest Nov 2012 #12
A million for advocacy...about 50k for actual legal fees. msanthrope Nov 2012 #16
Yes, I have learned a lot from these threads. I wish the Assange love would move over to Manning. freshwest Nov 2012 #17
He's still facing the death penalty. msanthrope Nov 2012 #18
Yes. It makes me wonder how much of internet culture and media that he grew up with, freshwest Nov 2012 #19
Nicely put. randome Nov 2012 #20
His trial will allow media--print media has been to all of the hearings, but you have a msanthrope Nov 2012 #21
In the age of video, people may not be paying attention to print, at least the ones we met online. freshwest Nov 2012 #22
Does this mean that credit card companies can second-guess JDPriestly Nov 2012 #8
The credit card companies' policies are primarily designed to protect struggle4progress Nov 2012 #10
Big stuff. I learn many angles I'd never know from these threads. freshwest Nov 2012 #13
Yes, that some people defend credit card companies. Hissyspit Nov 2012 #14
Six links from me so far in this thread, none from you struggle4progress Nov 2012 #15
Yeah. Hooray for the banksters! hear, hear! Zorra Nov 2012 #23
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Julian Assange expresses ...»Reply #9