Saturday, December 11, 2010
Friday, December 10, 2010
Wikileaks: A Big Dangerous US Government Con Job
by F. William Engdahl
The story on the surface makes for a script for a new Oliver Stone Hollywood thriller. A 39-year old Australian hacker holds the President of the United States and his State Department hostage to a gigantic cyber “leak,” unless the President leaves Julian Assange and his Wikileaks free to release hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive US Government memos. A closer look at the details, so far carefully leaked by the most ultra-establishment of international media such as the New York Times, reveals a clear agenda. That agenda coincidentally serves to buttress the agenda of US geopolitics around the world from Iran to Russia to North Korea. The Wikileaks is a big and dangerous US intelligence Con Job which will likely be used to police the Internet.
It is almost too perfectly-scripted to be true. A discontented 22-year old US Army soldier on duty in Baghdad, Bradley Manning, a low-grade US Army intelligence analyst, described as a loner, a gay in the military, a disgruntled “computer geek,” sifts through classified information at Forward Operating Base Hammer. He decides to secretly download US State Department email communications from the entire world over a period of eight months for hours a day, onto his blank CDs while pretending to be listening to Lady Gaga. In addition to diplomatic cables, Manning is believed to have provided WikiLeaks with helicopter gun camera video of an errant US attack in Baghdad on unarmed journalists, and with war logs from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Manning then is supposed to have tracked down a notorious former US computer hacker to get his 250,000 pages of classified US State Department cables out in the Internet for the whole world to see. He allegedly told the US hacker that the documents he had contained "incredible, awful things that belonged in the public domain and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington, DC." The hacker turned him in to US authorities so the story goes. Manning is now incommunicado since months in US military confinement so we cannot ask him, conveniently. The Pentagon routinely hires the best hackers to design their security systems.
Then the plot thickens. The 250,000 pages end up at the desk of Julian Assange, the 39-year-old Australian founder of a supposedly anti-establishment website with the cute name Wikileaks. Assange decides to selectively choose several of the world’s most ultra-establishment news media to exclusively handle the leaking job for him as he seems to be on the run from Interpol, not for leaking classified information, but for allegedly having consensual sex with two Swedish women who later decided it was rape.
He selects as exclusive newspapers to decide what is to be leaked the New York Times which did such service in promoting faked propaganda against Saddam that led to the Iraqi war, the London Guardian and Der Spiegel. Assange claims he had no time to sift through so many pages so handed them to the trusted editors of the establishment media for them to decide what should be released. Very “anti-establishment” that. The New York Times even assigned one of its top people, David E. Sanger, to control the release of the Wikileaks material. Sanger is no establishment outsider. He sits as a member of the elite Council on Foreign Relations as well as the Aspen Institute Strategy Group together with the likes of Condi Rice, former Defense Secretary William Perry, former CIA head John Deutch, former State Department Deputy Secretary and now World Bank head Robert Zoellick among others.
Indeed a strange choice of media for a person who claims to be anti-establishment. But then Assange also says he believes the US Government version of 9/11 and calls the Bilderberg Group a normal meeting of people, a very establishment view.
Not so secret cables…
The latest sensational Wikileaks documents allegedly from the US State Department embassies around the world to Washington are definitely not as Hillary Clinton claimed "an attack on America's foreign policy interests that have endangered innocent people." And they do not amount to what the Italian foreign minister, called the "September 11 of world diplomacy." The British government calls them a threat to national security and an aide to Canada’s Prime Minister calls on the CIA to assassinate Assange, as does kooky would-be US Presidential hopeful Sarah Palin.
Most important, the 250,000 cables are not "top secret" as we might have thought. Between two and three million US Government employees are cleared to see this level of "secret" document,[1] and some 500,000 people around the world have access to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRnet) where the cables were stored. Siprnet is not recommended for distribution of top-secret information. Only 6% or 15,000 pages of the documents have been classified as even secret, a level below top-secret. Another 40% were the lowest level, "confidential", while the rest were unclassified. In brief, it was not all that secret.[2]
Most of the revelations so far have been unspectacular. In Germany the revelations led to the removal of a prominent young FDP politician close to Guido Westerwelle who apparently liked to talk too much to his counterpart at the US Embassy. The revelations about Russian politics, that a US Embassy official refers to Putin and Medvedev as “Batman and Robin,” tells more about the cultural level of current US State Department personnel than it does about internal Russian politics.
But for anyone who has studied the craft of intelligence and of disinformation, a clear pattern emerges in the Wikileaks drama. The focus is put on select US geopolitical targets, appearing as Hillary Clinton put it “to justify US sanctions against Iran.” They claim North Korea with China’s granting of free passage to Korean ships despite US State Department pleas, send dangerous missiles to Iran. Saudi Arabia’s ailing King Abdullah reportedly called Iran’s President a Hitler.
Excuse to police the Internet?
What is emerging from all the sound and Wikileaks fury in Washington is that the entire scandal is serving to advance a long-standing Obama and Bush agenda of policing the until-now free Internet. Already the US Government has shut the Wikileaks server in the United States though no identifiable US law has been broken.
The process of policing the Web was well underway before the current leaks scandal. In 2009 Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller and Republican Olympia Snowe introduced the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (S.773). It would give the President unlimited power to disconnect private-sector computers from the internet. The bill "would allow the president to 'declare a cyber-security emergency' relating to 'non-governmental' computer networks and do what's necessary to respond to the threat." We can expect that now this controversial piece of legislation will get top priority when a new Republican House and the Senate convene in January.
The US Department of Homeland Security, an agency created in the political hysteria following 9/11 2001 that has been compared to the Gestapo, has already begun policing the Internet. They are quietly seizing and shutting down internet websites (web domains) without due process or a proper trial. DHS simply seizes web domains that it wants to and posts an ominous "Department of Justice" logo on the web site. See an example at http://torrent-finder.com. Over 75 websites were seized and shut in a recent week. Right now, their focus is websites that they claim "violate copyrights," yet the torrent-finder.com website that was seized by DHS contained no copyrighted content whatsoever. It was merely a search engine website that linked to destinations where people could access copyrighted content. Step by careful step freedom of speech can be taken away. Then what?
Notes
1. BBCNews, Siprnet: Where the leaked cables came from, 29 November, 2010, accessed in http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11863618
2. Ken Dilanian, Inside job: Stolen diplomatic cables show U.S. challenge of stopping authorized users, Los Angeles Times, November 29, 2010, accessed in http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sc-dc-1130-hackers-20101129,0,6716809.story
Source
The story on the surface makes for a script for a new Oliver Stone Hollywood thriller. A 39-year old Australian hacker holds the President of the United States and his State Department hostage to a gigantic cyber “leak,” unless the President leaves Julian Assange and his Wikileaks free to release hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive US Government memos. A closer look at the details, so far carefully leaked by the most ultra-establishment of international media such as the New York Times, reveals a clear agenda. That agenda coincidentally serves to buttress the agenda of US geopolitics around the world from Iran to Russia to North Korea. The Wikileaks is a big and dangerous US intelligence Con Job which will likely be used to police the Internet.
It is almost too perfectly-scripted to be true. A discontented 22-year old US Army soldier on duty in Baghdad, Bradley Manning, a low-grade US Army intelligence analyst, described as a loner, a gay in the military, a disgruntled “computer geek,” sifts through classified information at Forward Operating Base Hammer. He decides to secretly download US State Department email communications from the entire world over a period of eight months for hours a day, onto his blank CDs while pretending to be listening to Lady Gaga. In addition to diplomatic cables, Manning is believed to have provided WikiLeaks with helicopter gun camera video of an errant US attack in Baghdad on unarmed journalists, and with war logs from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Manning then is supposed to have tracked down a notorious former US computer hacker to get his 250,000 pages of classified US State Department cables out in the Internet for the whole world to see. He allegedly told the US hacker that the documents he had contained "incredible, awful things that belonged in the public domain and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington, DC." The hacker turned him in to US authorities so the story goes. Manning is now incommunicado since months in US military confinement so we cannot ask him, conveniently. The Pentagon routinely hires the best hackers to design their security systems.
Then the plot thickens. The 250,000 pages end up at the desk of Julian Assange, the 39-year-old Australian founder of a supposedly anti-establishment website with the cute name Wikileaks. Assange decides to selectively choose several of the world’s most ultra-establishment news media to exclusively handle the leaking job for him as he seems to be on the run from Interpol, not for leaking classified information, but for allegedly having consensual sex with two Swedish women who later decided it was rape.
He selects as exclusive newspapers to decide what is to be leaked the New York Times which did such service in promoting faked propaganda against Saddam that led to the Iraqi war, the London Guardian and Der Spiegel. Assange claims he had no time to sift through so many pages so handed them to the trusted editors of the establishment media for them to decide what should be released. Very “anti-establishment” that. The New York Times even assigned one of its top people, David E. Sanger, to control the release of the Wikileaks material. Sanger is no establishment outsider. He sits as a member of the elite Council on Foreign Relations as well as the Aspen Institute Strategy Group together with the likes of Condi Rice, former Defense Secretary William Perry, former CIA head John Deutch, former State Department Deputy Secretary and now World Bank head Robert Zoellick among others.
Indeed a strange choice of media for a person who claims to be anti-establishment. But then Assange also says he believes the US Government version of 9/11 and calls the Bilderberg Group a normal meeting of people, a very establishment view.
Not so secret cables…
The latest sensational Wikileaks documents allegedly from the US State Department embassies around the world to Washington are definitely not as Hillary Clinton claimed "an attack on America's foreign policy interests that have endangered innocent people." And they do not amount to what the Italian foreign minister, called the "September 11 of world diplomacy." The British government calls them a threat to national security and an aide to Canada’s Prime Minister calls on the CIA to assassinate Assange, as does kooky would-be US Presidential hopeful Sarah Palin.
Most important, the 250,000 cables are not "top secret" as we might have thought. Between two and three million US Government employees are cleared to see this level of "secret" document,[1] and some 500,000 people around the world have access to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRnet) where the cables were stored. Siprnet is not recommended for distribution of top-secret information. Only 6% or 15,000 pages of the documents have been classified as even secret, a level below top-secret. Another 40% were the lowest level, "confidential", while the rest were unclassified. In brief, it was not all that secret.[2]
Most of the revelations so far have been unspectacular. In Germany the revelations led to the removal of a prominent young FDP politician close to Guido Westerwelle who apparently liked to talk too much to his counterpart at the US Embassy. The revelations about Russian politics, that a US Embassy official refers to Putin and Medvedev as “Batman and Robin,” tells more about the cultural level of current US State Department personnel than it does about internal Russian politics.
But for anyone who has studied the craft of intelligence and of disinformation, a clear pattern emerges in the Wikileaks drama. The focus is put on select US geopolitical targets, appearing as Hillary Clinton put it “to justify US sanctions against Iran.” They claim North Korea with China’s granting of free passage to Korean ships despite US State Department pleas, send dangerous missiles to Iran. Saudi Arabia’s ailing King Abdullah reportedly called Iran’s President a Hitler.
Excuse to police the Internet?
What is emerging from all the sound and Wikileaks fury in Washington is that the entire scandal is serving to advance a long-standing Obama and Bush agenda of policing the until-now free Internet. Already the US Government has shut the Wikileaks server in the United States though no identifiable US law has been broken.
The process of policing the Web was well underway before the current leaks scandal. In 2009 Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller and Republican Olympia Snowe introduced the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (S.773). It would give the President unlimited power to disconnect private-sector computers from the internet. The bill "would allow the president to 'declare a cyber-security emergency' relating to 'non-governmental' computer networks and do what's necessary to respond to the threat." We can expect that now this controversial piece of legislation will get top priority when a new Republican House and the Senate convene in January.
The US Department of Homeland Security, an agency created in the political hysteria following 9/11 2001 that has been compared to the Gestapo, has already begun policing the Internet. They are quietly seizing and shutting down internet websites (web domains) without due process or a proper trial. DHS simply seizes web domains that it wants to and posts an ominous "Department of Justice" logo on the web site. See an example at http://torrent-finder.com. Over 75 websites were seized and shut in a recent week. Right now, their focus is websites that they claim "violate copyrights," yet the torrent-finder.com website that was seized by DHS contained no copyrighted content whatsoever. It was merely a search engine website that linked to destinations where people could access copyrighted content. Step by careful step freedom of speech can be taken away. Then what?
Notes
1. BBCNews, Siprnet: Where the leaked cables came from, 29 November, 2010, accessed in http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11863618
2. Ken Dilanian, Inside job: Stolen diplomatic cables show U.S. challenge of stopping authorized users, Los Angeles Times, November 29, 2010, accessed in http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sc-dc-1130-hackers-20101129,0,6716809.story
Source
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Helen Thomas Says Anti-Defamation League is Intimidating Her
Helen Thomas said on a radio show that aired Tuesday that the Anti-Defamation League was intimidating her. The journalist defended comments she made last Thursday in Dearborn.
"I just think that people should be enlightened as to who is in charge of the opinion in this country," Thomas, 90, told the Marion, Ohio, radio station WMRN-AM.
In response, ADL Director Abe Foxman told the Free Press on Wednesday that the group has a right to criticize Thomas, whose comments are "doing body blows to her image."
Thomas had said that Zionists control major U.S. institutions and Foxman, said her comments were "classic ... anti-Semitism." He called on groups to remove honors in her name. Hours later, Wayne State University pulled an award in her name.
Thomas, the daughter of Lebanese immigrants, grew up in Detroit and graduated from WSU.
"I'm going to tell the Anti-Defamation League to back off," Thomas said. "They think they have the right of intimidation." "They already got my job. They want to get my honorary degrees."
But Foxman, known for his work to combat anti-Semitism, said: "It's very sad that a woman of her stature ... just can't stop lashing out in anger."
To hear the interview, click here: www.wmrn.com/pages
Niraj Warikoo
Detroit Free Press
Source
"I just think that people should be enlightened as to who is in charge of the opinion in this country," Thomas, 90, told the Marion, Ohio, radio station WMRN-AM.
In response, ADL Director Abe Foxman told the Free Press on Wednesday that the group has a right to criticize Thomas, whose comments are "doing body blows to her image."
Thomas had said that Zionists control major U.S. institutions and Foxman, said her comments were "classic ... anti-Semitism." He called on groups to remove honors in her name. Hours later, Wayne State University pulled an award in her name.
Thomas, the daughter of Lebanese immigrants, grew up in Detroit and graduated from WSU.
"I'm going to tell the Anti-Defamation League to back off," Thomas said. "They think they have the right of intimidation." "They already got my job. They want to get my honorary degrees."
But Foxman, known for his work to combat anti-Semitism, said: "It's very sad that a woman of her stature ... just can't stop lashing out in anger."
To hear the interview, click here: www.wmrn.com/pages
Niraj Warikoo
Detroit Free Press
Source
Who Owns Your Mind? Mind Control and the Media By Christopher Bollyn
Mass media is the most powerful tool used by the ruling class to manipulate the masses. It shapes and molds opinions and attitudes and defines what is normal and acceptable.
- "Mind Control Theories and Techniques used by Mass Media"
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
- Edward Bernays, Propaganda
As a patriotic American who is deeply dismayed by the lack of resistance to the lies of 9/11 and the criminal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, I sometimes ask myself why Americans seem so apathetic in the face of such blatant injustice and evil. Either they don’t care or they are unable to see past the lies is the first logical explanation that comes to mind, but that just doesn’t make sense. Most Americans I know are very patriotic and deeply concerned about their nation. Most are able to discern fact from fiction. So what has hijacked their patriotism, corrupted their thinking, and prevents them from comprehending the outrageous criminal deception of 9/11 -- and standing up against it?
For most Americans, and other people living in modern developed societies, the mass media is the final arbiter of reality. While many Americans may have serious doubts and questions about 9/11, they believe in the “free press” and await the day the mass media will embrace the facts and evidence of what really happened. That day, however, will never come, at least not until the nexus between the military and the mass media is broken. In the absence of this correction most people will remain captive in the media's "Auschwitz of the mind," stupefied by its mind control and unable to resist the bold-faced lies of the government.
When we talk about "mind control," images of drugged and hypnotized assassins like Sirhan Sirhan may come to mind, but the process by which the media controls our minds is really very ordinary; it is as omnipresent and common as the television set in every American home.
Unlike most Americans of my age, I grew up without a television and have never owned one, so I hardly ever watch TV. Prior to my recent visit to Berlin, I hadn’t seen any television since watching the World Cup last summer. Nor do I listen to the radio.
When we visited Berlin in November, I had access to a television and watched the news on CNN and BBC World. With the 600 billion dollar quantitative easing (QE2) announced by the Federal Reserve, and the discovery of terror bombs coming from Yemen, there was certainly no shortage of news. What really disturbed me, however, was the utter shallowness of the discussion and the conspicuous omission of key facts.
On November 4, I bought the Financial Times and New York Times to see how these well-respected newspapers would report the Fed’s creation of 600 billion dollars out of thin air. Both papers simply said that the Fed “would buy an additional $600 billion in long-term Treasuries by the end of June 2011,” but nowhere did they describe how this buying of debt really works. For that, one would have to read The Web of Debt by Ellen Hodgson Brown, or a similar book that discusses how the Fed really works by creating debt to enslave the American people.
The most blatant mind control tactics were seen in the coverage of the Yemeni terror bombs that had supposedly been sent to some unnamed Jewish organization in Chicago. Photographs of the interior of the explosive-laden computer printer revealed the bomber’s return address. The evil genius who made the bomb had left the sticker with the serial number in plain sight, allowing government sleuths to track the bomb to Al Qaida in Yemen. The face of the suspected Arab culprit was then shown on the screen. The mind control exercise was complete. The fanatic Muslim fear button had been pushed once again.
Meanwhile, there were horrendous terror bombings in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq, in which hundreds of people were killed, and daily reports of C.I.A. missile strikes in Pakistan. The wicked asymmetry of the War on Terror could not be more obvious. The bombs sent to Islamic countries under U.S. occupation always cause huge numbers of casualties but are never investigated, while the bombs they send to us usually fail to detonate but make the headlines and are used to instill fear in the public. To be exposed to such mind-numbing propaganda was truly disturbing and left me feeling distinctly uneasy.
Read more...
- "Mind Control Theories and Techniques used by Mass Media"
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
- Edward Bernays, Propaganda
As a patriotic American who is deeply dismayed by the lack of resistance to the lies of 9/11 and the criminal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, I sometimes ask myself why Americans seem so apathetic in the face of such blatant injustice and evil. Either they don’t care or they are unable to see past the lies is the first logical explanation that comes to mind, but that just doesn’t make sense. Most Americans I know are very patriotic and deeply concerned about their nation. Most are able to discern fact from fiction. So what has hijacked their patriotism, corrupted their thinking, and prevents them from comprehending the outrageous criminal deception of 9/11 -- and standing up against it?
For most Americans, and other people living in modern developed societies, the mass media is the final arbiter of reality. While many Americans may have serious doubts and questions about 9/11, they believe in the “free press” and await the day the mass media will embrace the facts and evidence of what really happened. That day, however, will never come, at least not until the nexus between the military and the mass media is broken. In the absence of this correction most people will remain captive in the media's "Auschwitz of the mind," stupefied by its mind control and unable to resist the bold-faced lies of the government.
When we talk about "mind control," images of drugged and hypnotized assassins like Sirhan Sirhan may come to mind, but the process by which the media controls our minds is really very ordinary; it is as omnipresent and common as the television set in every American home.
Unlike most Americans of my age, I grew up without a television and have never owned one, so I hardly ever watch TV. Prior to my recent visit to Berlin, I hadn’t seen any television since watching the World Cup last summer. Nor do I listen to the radio.
When we visited Berlin in November, I had access to a television and watched the news on CNN and BBC World. With the 600 billion dollar quantitative easing (QE2) announced by the Federal Reserve, and the discovery of terror bombs coming from Yemen, there was certainly no shortage of news. What really disturbed me, however, was the utter shallowness of the discussion and the conspicuous omission of key facts.
On November 4, I bought the Financial Times and New York Times to see how these well-respected newspapers would report the Fed’s creation of 600 billion dollars out of thin air. Both papers simply said that the Fed “would buy an additional $600 billion in long-term Treasuries by the end of June 2011,” but nowhere did they describe how this buying of debt really works. For that, one would have to read The Web of Debt by Ellen Hodgson Brown, or a similar book that discusses how the Fed really works by creating debt to enslave the American people.
The most blatant mind control tactics were seen in the coverage of the Yemeni terror bombs that had supposedly been sent to some unnamed Jewish organization in Chicago. Photographs of the interior of the explosive-laden computer printer revealed the bomber’s return address. The evil genius who made the bomb had left the sticker with the serial number in plain sight, allowing government sleuths to track the bomb to Al Qaida in Yemen. The face of the suspected Arab culprit was then shown on the screen. The mind control exercise was complete. The fanatic Muslim fear button had been pushed once again.
Meanwhile, there were horrendous terror bombings in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq, in which hundreds of people were killed, and daily reports of C.I.A. missile strikes in Pakistan. The wicked asymmetry of the War on Terror could not be more obvious. The bombs sent to Islamic countries under U.S. occupation always cause huge numbers of casualties but are never investigated, while the bombs they send to us usually fail to detonate but make the headlines and are used to instill fear in the public. To be exposed to such mind-numbing propaganda was truly disturbing and left me feeling distinctly uneasy.
Read more...
David Icke Debunked (Full Movie)
This is 2.5 hour film from Chris White takes a very close look at
David Icke's history and beliefs. It reveals the true sources of David
Icke's theories which are often shocking , and should be very
concerning for a genuine seeker of truth. This is a well rounded
expose which is done respectfully, while still attempting to get the
average truther to reevaluate what they really know about the
"endgame" of the Illuminati.
BUSTED!! WIKILEAKS STRUCK A DEAL WITH ISRAEL OVER CABLE LEAKS
WikiLeaks ‘struck a deal with Israel’ over diplomatic cables leaks
“Assange met with Israeli officials in Geneva earlier this year and struck the secret deal. The Israel government, it seems, had somehow found out or expected that the documents to be leaked contained a large number of documents about the Israeli attacks on Lebanon and Gaza in 2006 and 2008-9 respectively. These documents, which are said to have originated mainly from the Israeli embassies in Tel Aviv and Beirut, where removed and possibly destroyed by Assange, who is the only person who knows the password that can open these documents, the sources added.”
We should obviously all support WikiLeaks and its founder and spokesperson, Julian Assange, who has just been arrested in Britain, in this dirty war by states around the globe against transparency and openness. But in the world of politics, sadly, things are never as innocent as they appear. According to new revelations, Assange had allegedly struck a deal with Israel before the recent ‘cable gate’, which may explain why the leaks “were good for Israel,” as the Israeli prime minister put it.
A number of commentators, particularly in Turkey and Russia, have been wondering why the hundreds of thousands of American classified documents leaked by the website last month did not contain anything that may embarrass the Israeli government, like just about every other state referred to in the documents. The answer appears to be a secret deal struck between the WikiLeaks “heart and soul”, as Assange humbly described himself once [1], with Israeli officials, which ensured that all such documents were ‘removed’ before the rest were made public.
According to an Arabic investigative journalism website [2], Assange had received money from semi-official Israeli sources and promised them, in a “secret, video-recorded agreement,” not to publish any document that may harm Israeli security or diplomatic interests.
The sources of the Al-Haqiqa report are said to be former WikiLeaks volunteers who have left the organisation in the last few months over Assange’s “autocratic leadership” and “lack of transparency.”
In a recent interview with the German daily Die Tageszeitung, former WikiLeaks spokesperson Daniel Domscheit-Berg said he and other WikiLeaks dissidents are planning to launch their own whistleblowers’ platform to fulfil WikiLeaks’s original aim of “limitless file sharing.” [3]
Read more...
“Assange met with Israeli officials in Geneva earlier this year and struck the secret deal. The Israel government, it seems, had somehow found out or expected that the documents to be leaked contained a large number of documents about the Israeli attacks on Lebanon and Gaza in 2006 and 2008-9 respectively. These documents, which are said to have originated mainly from the Israeli embassies in Tel Aviv and Beirut, where removed and possibly destroyed by Assange, who is the only person who knows the password that can open these documents, the sources added.”
We should obviously all support WikiLeaks and its founder and spokesperson, Julian Assange, who has just been arrested in Britain, in this dirty war by states around the globe against transparency and openness. But in the world of politics, sadly, things are never as innocent as they appear. According to new revelations, Assange had allegedly struck a deal with Israel before the recent ‘cable gate’, which may explain why the leaks “were good for Israel,” as the Israeli prime minister put it.
A number of commentators, particularly in Turkey and Russia, have been wondering why the hundreds of thousands of American classified documents leaked by the website last month did not contain anything that may embarrass the Israeli government, like just about every other state referred to in the documents. The answer appears to be a secret deal struck between the WikiLeaks “heart and soul”, as Assange humbly described himself once [1], with Israeli officials, which ensured that all such documents were ‘removed’ before the rest were made public.
According to an Arabic investigative journalism website [2], Assange had received money from semi-official Israeli sources and promised them, in a “secret, video-recorded agreement,” not to publish any document that may harm Israeli security or diplomatic interests.
The sources of the Al-Haqiqa report are said to be former WikiLeaks volunteers who have left the organisation in the last few months over Assange’s “autocratic leadership” and “lack of transparency.”
In a recent interview with the German daily Die Tageszeitung, former WikiLeaks spokesperson Daniel Domscheit-Berg said he and other WikiLeaks dissidents are planning to launch their own whistleblowers’ platform to fulfil WikiLeaks’s original aim of “limitless file sharing.” [3]
Read more...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)