Now remember and read closely… this article was written PRIOR to Wikileaks’ first big “leak”, which according to the article was to occur sometime in March of 2007.
So why would TIME magazine be writing about them in the first place if they hadn’t done anything yet? Also, let’s not pass up on that delicious irony: this is TIME magazine singing the praises of a supposed “leak” site which will supposedly expose all kinds of “conspiracy theories” while at the same time telling their readers NOT to believe in those silly “conspiracy theories” circulating about Wikileaks. Just so long as you believe the “right” conspiracy theories, you’ll be alright I guess. This of course perfectly matches Jullian Assange’s own statements about 9/11.
TIME goes on to explain that the Wikileaks version will be the “correct” version (even though they had yet to publish anything at that point… pretty far out on that credibility limb for TIME if you ask me…)
So it would appear that TIME and the Washington Post had to come out with supportive articles about Wikileaks because someone was “leaking” information and questions about them and their little project looked doomed to fail before it even got off the ground. Perhaps they got a little help writing all that propaganda from one of Julian Assange’s first partners in the project… a PR guy affiliated with ABC and News Corp’s Rupert Murdoch.
Gene Shalit, the legendary film critic best known for his long run on NBC's "Today" show,...:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(999x0:1001x2)/kristen-welker-meet-the-press-091123-6-6e558db5019447e2908efbb4812ee1e9.jpg)
President Trump abruptly ended his interview with NBC News’s Kristen Welker on Friday, after the two...
Russian overnight strikes across Kharkiv region killed three people in Chuhuiv and injured at least 15...
The end of the 60 Minutes broadcast as we know it has sickened millions of longtime...
