Anonymous hit on US defense contractor ……………..
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com
![]() Anonymous’ propaganda poster for Operation Egypt, its solidarity campaign in support of Egypt’s street protests. Image courtesy of Anonymous
|
Anonymous, the international cyberactivist network, has announced the release of 90,000 military email logins which its members obtained in one of the biggest-ever hacking operations.
According to Al Jazeera, the group promised that the publication of the documents on several websites on Monday is only the first in a series of leaks intended to show the intelligence community’s vulnerability.
This round of emails comes from Booz Allen Hamilton, a management consultancy firm based in Virginia, United States.
Booz Allen Hamilton is active in the Middle East and North Africa, with its regional headquarters in the United Arab Emirates.
“With a multidisciplinary approach, Booz Allen provides robust cybersecurity solutions to a broad range of clients and industries, enabling them to confidently pursue the opportunities offered by the cyber revolution,” reads a statement on the company’s website.
The company on its Twitter feed it wrote: “As part of @BoozAllen security policy, we generally do not comment on specific threats or actions taken against our systems.”
A flurry of commentary around the operation began immediately on the microblogging site Twitter under the hashtag #MilitaryMeltdownMonday.
There were hints that other similar military or intelligence contractors may be next to catch attention in the emerging “Antisec” movement.
“ATTN Intelligence community: Your contractors have failed you. Tomorrow is the beginning,” an Anon known as Sabu wrote on Twitter under the handle of @anonymouSabu.
Sabu’s tweets, widely retweeted by other Anons, promised “two of the biggest releases for Anonymous in the last four years”.
Hours earlier, Anons breached the security of IRC Federal, an IT contractor that works for federal agencies in the US, including the FBI and NASA.
A representative at IRC Federal’s head office in West Virginia told the company had reported the incident to the authorities and had no further comment.
He said it was not clear why the firm, which employs less than 35 people, had been targeted.
A statement from Anonymous called on the firm’s employees to stop working for “corporations and a government which uses unethical means to corner vast amounts of wealth”.
“They [IRC] brag about their multi-million dollar partnership with the FBI, Army, Navy, NASA, and the Department of Justice, selling out their “skills” to the US empire. So we laid nuclear waste to their systems, owning their pathetic windows box, dropping their databases and private emails, and defaced their professional looking website,” the statement said.
The amorphous group is in constant evolution, though freedom of speech remains an underlying preoccupation.
It rushed to the defence of WikiLeaks, launching high-profile attacks against financial companies when they responded to governments’ requests to cut the whistle-blowing website’s income.
The latest operations come on the eve of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s appeal hearing against his extradition.
With its support for the Arab uprisings, it went from being largely based in Western countries to gaining popularity amongst like-minded activists in North Africa and the Middle East.
Gabriella Coleman, an anthropologist at NYU’s media department, said that Anonymous has “set the bar very high” in the buildup to this latest series of operations.
“If it is indeed a splash,” she said of this week’s operations, “I think it’ll be a defining moment.”
The hacking of Booz Allen Hamilton and IRC Federal had been conducted in what appeared to be a more open, inclusive manner than similar hacking activities in the past, she said.
“With every twist and turn, new possibilities have opened up.”
Anonymous’ regular online meeting place, the Anonops Internet Relay Chat (IRC), a secure form of online chat room, has been taken offline by “distributed denial of service” (DDoS) attacks carried out by an unknown group. The site, where Anons discuss their operations has been unavailable since Friday and was still unavailable at the time of writing.
In recent months, the movement has come under growing international pressure. Its members have been arrested in Spain, Italy and the United Kingdom, while in the US, its members have been targeted by subpoenas.
Yet, as Monday’s operation demonstrated, the Anons are growing bolder than ever. A defiant press release followed the crackdown in Italy, reiterating that the groups’ lack of leadership or structure made it impossible to dismantle.
“All Anonymous members operate at the same level. Those arrested are not ‘dangerous hackers’ as the media calls them, but people like you. They have been arrested while peacefully protesting for their and your rights. Our protest will continue louder than ever.”
.
WikiLeaks Exposes North American Integration Plot
| http://www.thenewamerican.com
Written by Alex Newman |
| Monday, 02 May 2011 21:00 |
As early as January of 2005, high-ranking officials were discussing the best way to sell the idea of North American “integration”to the public and policymakers while getting around national constitutions. The prospect of creating a monetary unit to replace national currencies was a hot topic as well.Some details of the schemes were exposed in a secret 2005 U.S. embassy cable from Ottawa signed by then-Ambassador Paul Cellucci. The document was released by WikiLeaks on April 28. But so far, it has barely attracted any attention in the United States, Canada, or Mexico beyond a few mentions in some liberty-minded Internet forums.
Numerous topics are discussed in the leaked document — borders, currency, labor, regulation, and more. How to push the integration agenda features particularly prominently. Under the subject line “Placing a new North American Initiative in its economic policy context,” American diplomatic personnel in Canada said they believed an “incremental” path toward North American integration would probably gain the most support from policymakers. Apparently Canadian economists agreed. The cable also touts the supposed benefits of merging the three countries and even mentions what elements to “stress” in future “efforts to promote further integration.” It lists what it claims is a summary of the “consensus” among Canadian economists about the issues, too. Merging the United States, Canada, and Mexico Integration is a little-used term employed mainly by policy wonks. But while it may sound relatively harmless, it generally describes a very serious phenomenon when used in a geopolitical context — the gradual merging of separate countries under a regional authority. Similar processes are already well underway in Europe, Africa, and South America. And according to critics, the results — essentially abolishing national sovereignty in favor of supranational, unaccountable governance — have been an unmitigated disaster. But the U.S. government doesn’t think so. In North America, integration has been proceeding rapidly for years. The New American magazine was among the first to report on the efforts to erect what critics have called a “North American Union,” encompassing Canada, the United States, and Mexico. But more recently, the topic has received more attention. After the creation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) — similar in many ways to the European Common Market that preceded the political union in Europe — the integration scheme has only accelerated. And the bipartisan efforts have been going on for years. Under President George W. Bush, integration occurred through the little-known “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.” And with the Obama administration, the process, now virtually out in the open, is only accelerating. Back in 2005, the cable released recently by WikiLeaks explained how it would be done. And looking back, the document was right on the mark. Moving Forward The best way forward, according to the cable, is via gradual steps. “An incremental and pragmatic package of tasks for a new North American Initiative (NAI) will likely gain the most support among Canadian policymakers,” the cable states in its summary. “Our research leads us to conclude that such a package should tackle both ‘security’ and ‘prosperity’ goals,” the document claims, using the two key words that have been emphasized at every step along the way. “This fits the recommendations of Canadian economists who have assessed the options for continental integration.” Toward the end, the cable offers more advice on how to advance the integration agenda by tailoring the narrative. “When advocating [the North American Initiative to integrate the three countries], it would be better to highlight specific gains to individual firms, industries or travelers, and especially consumers,” the cable states, noting that it’s harder to “estimate the benefits” on a national or continental scale. Unsubstantiated Claims In a section headlined “North American Integration: What We Know,” the cable offers nothing but praise for the merging of the continent’s once-sovereign nations that had already been achieved. “Past integration (not just NAFTA but also many bilateral and unilateral steps) has increased trade, economic growth, and productivity,” it claims, despite the fact that countless economists disagree. Of course, true free-trade advocates also correctly point out that the thousands of pages of regulations making up the agreements should hardly be considered examples of genuine free trade. So-called “security,” the other big integration selling point, is featured prominently in the document as well. “A stronger continental ‘security perimeter’ can strengthen economic performance,“ the cable states. “It could also facilitate future steps toward trilateral economic integration, such as a common external tariff or a customs union.” And law enforcement “cooperation” is good too, the embassy and the U.S. ambassador claim matter-of-factly. “Cooperative measures on the ‘security’ side, a critical focus of current bilateral efforts, can deliver substantial, early, and widespread economic benefits,” the cable alleges, offering no evidence to substantiate the assertions. “Security and law enforcement within North America have evolved rapidly since 9/11,” it continues. “Collaboration to improve these processes could yield efficiency improvements which would automatically be spread widely across the economy, leading to general gains in trade, productivity, and incomes.” The Alleged “Consensus” According to the document, “many” economists agree with the scheme. The cable says they support the principle of “more ambitious integration goals” such as a customs union, a single market, and even a continental currency to replace the dollar. On top of that, they supposedly believe such a union should involve all three major North American countries — the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The cable cautions, however, that “most” of the economists believe the gradual approach is “most appropriate” — for now, at least. And all of them apparently agree that such an approach “helps pave the way to these goals if and when North Americans choose to pursue them.” The embassy cable also included a summary of what it calls the “professional consensus” among Canadian economists on various issues related to integration. “At this time, an ‘incremental’ approach to integration is probably better than a ‘big deal’ approach,” the document states under the “process” subheading, supposedly referring to the economists’ opinions. “However, governments should focus on choosing their objectives, and not on choosing a process.” Next in the cable is the question of “border vs. perimeter,” as the formerly secret document puts it. “Even with zero tariffs, our land borders have strong commercial effects,” the embassy said. However, “some” of the effects — such as law enforcement and “data gathering” — are described as “positive.” “Canada and the United States already share a security perimeter to some degree; it is just a question of how strong we want to make it,” the 2005 document notes. Apparently Canadians’ main reason for seeking a perimeter approach to security and borders, as opposed to a border between the two nations, is to avoid the “risk” that “discretionary” U.S. decisions to stop terror or disease might impede commerce. And evidently, the nations’ rulers did decide to make the perimeter stronger. As The New American reported in February, U.S. President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper met in Washington, D.C., to hammer out a deal on solidifying the common “perimeter” around the two countries. Also part of the agreement, which conspicuously bypassed both countries’ legislatures, was a diminished role for the nations’ shared border. The development of a biometric system to track North Americans was agreed to as well, as were numerous other controversial measures. In terms of labor markets, the so-called “consensus” among the unidentified Canadian economists is also — surprise! — the pursuit of even more integration. “Many Canadian economists point to labor markets — both within and among countries — as the factor market [sic] where more liberalization would deliver the greatest economic benefits for all three countries,” the document states. Next, the cable release by WikiLeaks highlights another startling proposition about how to achieve an end-run around the Canadian Constitution. “Inter-provincial differences [in regulation] are important here, since Canada’s federal government does not have the benefit of a U.S.-style ‘interstate commerce’ clause,” the document states. “While much of the problem is domestic in nature, an international initiative could help to catalyze change.” Yes, the U.S. embassy referred to the wildly abused and misapplied “commerce clause” as a “benefit” that Canada lacks. And it actually suggested, hiding behind unnamed “economists,” that the constitutional “problem” could be minimized by foisting an “international initiative” on the Canadian people. The cable also claims the “economists” support a customs union, a feature developed in the European Union once the integration process was well established. “A common external tariff, or a customs union which eliminated NAFTA’s rules of origin (ROO), is economically desirable,” it states. And finally, the document summarizes the “consensus” on the subject of a currency union. It said the supposed economists were “split” on the issues of returning to fixed exchange rates or even abolishing Canada’s fiat dollar and replacing it with American Federal Reserve fiat currency. The cable gives the final word on the topic of a currency union to the Canadian central bank boss. He is quoted as saying that “monetary union is an issue that should be considered once we have made more progress towards establishing a single market.” Secrets, Backers The scheme to merge North America into a political unit with its own legislature and currency is largely the brainchild of the world government-promoting Council on Foreign Relations. But though documents leaked earlier this year revealed that governments were trying to keep the process under wraps, integration is now proceeding out in the open for the most part. Where the campaign will eventually end remains to be seen. But if North American Union advocates get their way, the U.S. Constitution and its Mexican and Canadian counterparts could soon be rendered irrelevant. After that, plugging the regional units into a global system would be a relatively simple matter, critics and supporters both argue. end org post…….- here a video from 2008 . |
ASSANGE TERRIFIED OF “THE JEWS”…TODAY’S LAUGH
http://www.veteranstoday.com
Julian Assange has admitted that he is afraid of “a combined Jewish American attack” if he chooses to publish information harmful to the State of Israel
Antisemitism 2010 – Trends and Assessments Summary
“We preferred not to publish anything about Israel in the first week of the “Wikileaks” publications because this would have caused considerable problems – stated Julian Assange, the owner of the popular leaks website, in an interview with the French newspaper “AgoraVox” which is published in the area of the City of Strasburg.
In an interview that took place several weeks ago but whose contents were only published yesterday (Wednesday) he refers relatively extensively to the Israeli subject. “We put out files from other countries at the beginning”, said Assange, “at the time we did not have in our possession many files about Israel and we were also scared of an attack on us from the East Coast of the United States”.
It would appear that Assange was referring to an attack that would be made on him by the American Jewish Organizations, most of whom are located in New York and Washington. “If we had specifically chosen to start “Wikileaks” publications with information about States that are considered to be sensitive, we would have already found ourselves under attack which would have diverted us from our course”, he stated.
Assange was asked in that interview whether he had anything to fear from the State of Israel and answered “definitely”, explaining that he was concerned about the strong links between Jerusalem and Washington. “The connection between the two countries is what frightens me” he admitted. “Moreover, they had identical interests during the period of the war in Iraq and Bush was surrounded by colleagues who managed oil companies”.
“Israel has deep rooted connections on the East Coast of the USA, and not just because of the presence of a high number of Jews there, but also because the Jews of the East Coast have obtained Israeli passports in order to strengthen the connection with their homeland”, claimed Assange.
.
Bradley Manning Now “Catatonic”; Obama ENOUGH!
http://www.uruknet.info
![]()
pic courtesy : http://www.fullissue.com
Ralph Lopez
War Is A Crime, March 8, 2011
As Obama’s crime of the destruction of Bradley Manning continues to unfold before our very eyes, Manning friend David House now tells us that over 8 months in isolation with movement and sleep restrictions placed on him have been having their intended effect. House has told MSNBC that by the end of January Manning appeared “catatonic” and that he had “severe problems communicating,” with it having taken House nearly 45 minutes on a recent visit to engage in any meaningful way (video below.) House said Manning’s demeanor was as “if he had just woken up and didn’t know what was going on around him.” Manning was “utterly exhausted physically and mentally…it was difficult to have any kind of social engagement.”
Also, a full month after Congressman Dennis Kucinich formally requested a visit, the Army has stalled on the request.
All for the crime of reporting war crimes and criminal behavior even among the highest-ranking military officials in Iraq.
In 2005, General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said: “It is absolutely the responsibility of every U.S. service member [in Iraq], if they see inhumane treatment being conducted, to try to stop it.”
Chase Mader writes in HuffPo that soon after deployment to Iraq, Manning:
“soon found himself helping the Iraqi authorities detain civilians for distributing “anti-Iraqi literature” — which turned out to be an investigative report into financial corruption in their own government entitled “Where does the money go?” The penalty for this “crime” in Iraq was not a slap on the wrist. Imprisonment and torture, as well as systematic abuse of prisoners, are widespread in the new Iraq. From the military’s own Sigacts (Significant Actions) reports, we have a multitude of credible accounts of Iraqi police and soldiers shooting prisoners, beating them to death, pulling out fingernails or teeth, cutting off fingers, burning with acid, torturing with electric shocks or the use of suffocation, and various kinds of sexual abuse including sodomization with gun barrels and forcing prisoners to perform sexual acts on guards and each other…
Like any good soldier, Manning immediately took these concerns up the chain of command. And how did his superiors respond? His commanding officer told him to “shut up” and get back to rounding up more prisoners for the Iraqi Federal Police to treat however they cared to…”
Manning also found a video and an official report on American air strikes on the village of Granai in Afghanistan’s Farah Province (also known as “the Granai massacre”). According to the Afghan government, 140 civilians, including women and a large number of children, died in those strikes.
War crimes? What war crimes? This is the point of view of the Pentagon as it destroys Bradley Manning.
On the Haditha killings (found to be “collateral damage” by the Army despite an American officer’s unearthing and handing up the chain of command a video showing close up bullet wounds) a recent Counterpunch article by Medea Benjamin and Charles Davis recounts:
” Consider what happened to the U.S. soldiers who, over a period of hours – not minutes – went house to house in the Iraqi town of Haditha and executed 24 men, women and children in retaliation for a roadside bombing. I watched them shoot my grandfather, first in the chest and then in the head,” said one of the two surviving eyewitnesses to the massacre, nine-year-old Eman Waleed. “Then they killed my granny.” Almost five years later, not one of the men involved in the incident is behind bars. And despite an Army investigation revealing that statements made by the chain of command “suggest that Iraqi civilian lives are not as important as U.S. lives,” with the murder of brown-skinned innocents considered “just the cost of doing business,” none of their superiors are behind bars either.”
Massacres of civilians in retaliation for IEDs seems to have been standard fare in Iraq. Ethan McCord says his unit was ordered to engage in “360 rotational” fireand “kill every mother&* in the street” in the event of an IED. The officer who gave the order was Col. Ralph Kauzlarich, “the lost Kauz” who is featured in David Finkel’s book “The Good Soldiers.” Col. K is also the executive officer who led the first investigation into the death of Pat Tillman.
Josh Stieber, a McCord unit-mate who also witnessed the order, said the logic was to get residents to be “pro-active” in preventing the planting of roadside bombs. Brass knew that the people in the houses nearest probably saw it planted and didn’t say anything.
Stieber on Antiwarradio.com:
“Yeah, it was an order that came from Kauzlarich himself, and it had the philosophy that, you know, as Finkel does describe in the book, that we were under pretty constant threat, and what he leaves out is the response to that threat. But the philosophy was that if each time one of these roadside bombs went off where you don’t know who set it … the way we were told to respond was to open fire on anyone in the area, with the philosophy that that would intimidate them, to be proactive in stopping people from making these bombs …”
Now nine Afghan children have been killed after what the Army says was mistaken identity after a nearby rocket attack on American forces. These boys could have been the boys some on this site got to know well in the New Year’s Global Call for Peace (they weren’t, but they were just as precious.)
Defense Secretary Robert Gates once said people like Bradley Manning have “blood on their hands” for releasing documents which might identify Afghan informants. But look down Robert, and don’t flinch. They are dripping.
Commander-in-Chief Obama, order Bradley Manning released!
The White House
Phone Numbers
Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: 202-456-2461
Webform for email: www.whitehouse.gov/contact
You can also comment on the WH FaceBook page.
Also demand your congressman speak up and castigate this administration for the treatment of Bradley Manning, leave a voicemail if it is after-hours (24/7):
Capitol switchboard: 202-224-3121
January 3: Psychologists for Social Responsibility write an open letter highlighting the severely deleterious effects on the psychological well-being
January 24: Amnesty International called on US authorities “to alleviate the harsh pre-trial detention conditions of Bradley Manning”
:: Article nr. 75688 sent on 09-mar-2011 08:21 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=75688
:: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website.
The section for the comments of our readers has been closed, because of many out-of-topics.
Now you can post your own comments into our Facebook page: www.facebook.com/uruknet
.
How one man tracked down Anonymous – and paid a heavy price
In a private e-mail to a colleague at his security firm HBGary Federal, which sells digital tools to the US government, the CEO bragged about his research project.
“They think I have nothing but a heirarchy based on IRC [Internet Relay Chat] aliases!” he wrote. “As 1337 as these guys are suppsed to be they don’t get it. I have pwned them!
“
But had he?
Barr’s “pwning” meant finding out the names and addresses of the top Anonymous leadership. While the group claimed to be headless, Barr believed this to be a lie; indeed, he told others that Anonymous was a tiny group.
“At any given time there are probably no more than 20-40 people active, accept during hightened points of activity like Egypt and Tunisia where the numbers swell but mostly by trolls,” he wrote in an internal e-mail. (All e-mails in this investigative report are provided verbatim, typos and all.) “Most of the people in the IRC channel are zombies to inflate the numbers.”
The show was run by a couple of admins he identified as “Q,” “Owen,” and “CommanderX” – and Barr had used social media data and subterfuge to map those names to three real people, two in California and one in New York.
Near the end of January, Barr began publicizing his information, though without divulging the names of the Anonymous admins. When the Financial Times picked up the story and ran a piece on it on February 4, it wasn’t long before Barr got what he wanted – contacts from the FBI, the Director of National Intelligence, and the US military. The FBI had been after Anonymous for some time, recently kicking in doors while executing 40 search warrants against group members.
Confident in his abilities, Barr told one of the programmers who helped him on the project, “You just need to program as good as I analyze.”
But on February 5, one day after the Financial Times article and six days before Barr’s sit-down with the FBI, Anonymous did some “pwning” of its own. “Ddos!!! Fckers,” Barr sent from his iPhone as a distributed denial of service attack hit his corporate network. He then pledged to “take the gloves off.”
When the liberal blog Daily Kos ran a story on Barr’s work later that day, some Anonymous users commented on it. Barr sent out an e-mail to colleagues, and he was getting worked up: “They think all I know is their irc names!!!!! I know their real fing names. Karen [HBGary Federal's public relations head] I need u to help moderate me because I am getting angry. I am planning on releasing a few names of folks that were already arrested. This battle between us will help spur publicity anyway.”
Indeed, publicity was the plan. Barr hoped his research would “start a verbal braul between us and keep it going because that will bring more media and more attention to a very important topic.”
But within a day, Anonymous had managed to infiltrate HBGary Federal’s website and take it down, replacing it with a pro-Anonymous message (“now the Anonymous hand is bitch-slapping you in the face.”) Anonymous got into HBGary Federal’s e-mail server, for which Barr was the admin, and compromised it, extracting over 40,000 e-mails and putting them up on The Pirate Bay, all after watching his communications for 30 hours, undetected. In an after-action IRC chat, Anonymous members bragged about how they had gone even further, deleting 1TB of HBGary backup data.
They even claimed to have wiped Barr’s iPad remotely.
The situation got so bad for the security company that HBGary, the company which partially owns HBGary Federal, sent its president Penny Leavy into the Anonymous IRC chat rooms to swim with the sharks – and to beg them to leave her company alone. (Read the bizarre chat log.) Instead, Anonymous suggested that, to avoid more problems, Leavy should fire Barr and “take your investment in aaron’s company and donate it to BRADLEY MANNINGS DEFENCE FUND.” Barr should cough off up a personal contribution, too; say, one month’s salary?
As for Barr’s “pwning,” Leavy couldn’t backtrack from it fast enough. “We have not seen the list [of Anonymous admins] and we are kind of pissed at him right now.”
Were Barr’s vaunted names even correct? Anonymous insisted repeatedly that they were not. As one admin put it in the IRC chat with Leavy, “Did you also know that aaron was peddling fake/wrong/false information leading to the potential arrest of innocent people?” The group then made that information public, claiming that it was all ridiculous.
Thanks to the leaked e-mails, we now have the full story of how Barr infiltrated Anonymous, used social media to compile his lists, and even resorted to attacks on the codebase of the Low Orbit Ion Cannon used in attacks – and how others at his own company warned him about the pitfalls of his own research.
Two Heads of the Same Coin, “Elvis Bin Laden” and “Wiki-Israel”
http://dprogram.net
Posted by sakerfa on January 23rd, 2011
(RedactedNews) – In 1977 Elvis Presley, “King of Rock and Roll”, died. Since his death, sightings of Elvis around the world have numbered in the tens of thousands. In 2001 Osama bin Laden, CIA asset and critic of Israel’s policies in Palestine, died. Since his death several video tapes and a string of audio recordings have been attributed to him.
In a sense, bin Laden has become “Elvis bin Laden,” the “King of Terrorism”. However, unlike the real Elvis, whose musical legacy will live forever, the legacy of “Elvis bin Laden”, the “Al Qaeda” organization and the illusory underground Tora Bora “terror-plex” is only kept alive by the charlatans of the military-industrial complex and their media partners.
“THERE AREN’T ONE OF THOSE, THERE ARE MANY OF THOSE”…Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense
“10 YEARS AND STILL LOOKING…STILL LOOKING…STILL LOOKING…WHAT WE NEED IS RUMSFELD STRAPPED DOWN, A FLASHLIGHT, A BLOWTORCH AND A PROCTOLOGIST.“…Gordon Duff, Veterans Today
- The Taliban managed to supply video of the kidnapped journalists, but only audio of Elvis Bin Laden. Perhaps the physical deterioration of years of decomposition has made him camera shy;
- The Taliban, warlike, proud Pashtun tribesmen of Afghanistan and Pakistan never accepted bin Laden or any Arab as a leader. In fact, Arabs are barely tolerated as guests, when they “behave”, and then only because the teachings of the Koran demand it. They are not held in esteem and are seen by the Taliban as a nuisance.
- They come from Israeli sources
- They blame America and Arabs for everything
- They call for attacks on America, implying that Israel’s actions against Palestinians are entirely America’s responsibility.
Source: Redacted News
.
Zahir Ebrahim: WOW – Israel Shamir Works for Wikileaks!
WOW: Israel Shamir Works for Wikileaks – And He Did Not Tell Us About This When He Called Us ‘Denier’!
By Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
My response to the unexpected confirmation that ASSANGE & SHAMIR – DISINFORMATION AGENTS?, is reproduced below. This case once again underscores the fact that the beleaguered public, wildly searching for leaders and guidance among the alternate media and the various dissent-chiefs who dominate it, simply cannot trust anyone to be who they claim they are just because they play dissent. See my report Manufacturing Dissent. As also my recent discovery concerning the famous rebel-author on banking reform, Ellen Brown, J.D.!
While dissent-chief extraordinaire, recovering former Israeli Military Occupation Forces Russian-Jewish soldier for Zion, turned Swedish-Christian pacifist-soldier for Jesus, a favorite of many beleaguered Muslims, speaker to many an audience worldwide, Israel Shamir’s bizarredom is cogently explained by this new revelation of his association with Julian Assange, Ellen Brown’s bizarre statements: “Of course the oligarchy is the problem, but that doesn’t mean we can’t steer the Fed. Bernanke drives a Ford Falcon. I think he’s one of us!”, and “the U.S. is the last holdout, and the Fed is what’s holding us out. Bernanke is standing up to the Gnomes of Zurich and Basel”, still remain inexplicable. Are these two secretly friends too?
This explains much to me. Thanks [to blogger writing under the nom de plume aangirfan] for discovering the references that Israel Shamir actually works for Wikileaks!
I was initially very surprised when Israel Shamir, with whom I had corresponded a few times over the years, mentioned my name in one of his articles along with others, and wrote:
‘Theirs are familiar and respected names of the free web: F. William Engdahl, Gordon Duff, Zahir Ebrahim.’
‘They are not to be accused of collaboration with Pentagon and the CIA.’
And then he went on to strangely label me a “denier”:
‘A second denier, young Pakistani intellectual cum American Ivy League graduate Zahir Ebrahim, writes: “The core-lies retained in the Wikileaks’ disclosure is to once again reaffirm that there is a real nemesis called “Osama Bin Laden”, that the “war on terror” is real, that it is being inflicted upon the West from the Pakistan-Iran nexus, in order to re-substantiate the handoff of former President George W. Bush’s clairvoyance to the Obama Administration that “If another September 11 style attack is being planned, it probably is being plotted in Pakistan, and not Afghanistan”!
Zahir makes the same mistake. The files are the reports of what US officials believe or claim to believe. I’d ask Zahir: if you were to get hold of all reports sent from and to Afghanistan, would you censor them to remove ideas and names that are not to your liking? Remember, these are not files from God Almighty, this is the kind of stuff that spooks and soldiers write, and it naturally reflects their view of the world. So it is not “core-lies”, but “core-truth”: US officials express under the stamp of “top secret” the very same views they openly espouse.’
I couldn’t believe this load of crap – he first published it in the article titled “Wikileaks: The Real Stuff” (subsequently also published under other titles I believe), and then forwarded it to me and others mentioned for comment without disclosing that he actually worked for Wikileaks (!!)
While I had him pegged as a disinfo artist immediately, I couldn’t really grasp his motivation.
Why would a stellar dissent-chief coasting on his reputation with a loyal following of sycophant (like all other dissent-chiefs) be so stupid as to believe any of that Wikileaks business when it was all so transparent, and he was supposedly a very learned person with command of this and that, and all that? But Chomsky and Ellsberg believed it too – and I already knew them to be controlled dissent. So, since a man is known by the mantras he echoes, was Israel Shamir too one of them? How did that transpire – for it wasn’t at all obvious from what little I knew of his background. I had in fact met him at Stanford University many years ago when he came there to give a talk, and I had come away rather impressed by the metanoia of this fellow, even mentioning his metanoia in one of my essays.
The fog is lifted here, just by looking at the photograph above!
Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
January 19, 2011 Comment for: http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2010/12/assange-shamir-disinformation-agents.html
.
Swiss whistleblower Rudolf Elmer plans to hand over offshore banking secrets of the rich and famous to WikiLeaks
http://www.sott.net
He will disclose the details of ‘massive potential tax evasion’ before he flies home to stand trial over his actions.
The offshore bank account details of 2,000 “high net worth individuals” and corporations – detailing massive potential tax evasion – will be handed over to the WikiLeaks organisation in London tomorrow by the most important and boldest whistleblower in Swiss banking history, Rudolf Elmer, two days before he goes on trial in his native Switzerland.
British and American individuals and companies are among the offshore clients whose details will be contained on CDs presented to WikiLeaks at the Frontline Club in London. Those involved include, Elmer tells the Observer, “approximately 40 politicians”.
Elmer, who after his press conference will return to Switzerland from exile in Mauritius to face trial, is a former chief operating officer in the Cayman Islands and employee of the powerful Julius Baer bank, which accuses him of stealing the information.
He is also – at a time when the activities of banks are a matter of public concern – one of a small band of employees and executives seeking to blow the whistle on what they see as unprofessional, immoral and even potentially criminal activity by powerful international financial institutions.
Along with the City of London and Wall Street, Switzerland is a fortress of banking and financial services, but famously secretive and expert in the concealment of wealth from all over the world for tax evasion and other extra-legal purposes.
Elmer says he is releasing the information “in order to educate society”. The list includes “high net worth individuals”, multinational conglomerates and financial institutions – hedge funds”. They are said to be “using secrecy as a screen to hide behind in order to avoid paying tax”. They come from the US, Britain, Germany, Austria and Asia – “from all over”.
Clients include “business people, politicians, people who have made their living in the arts and multinational conglomerates – from both sides of the Atlantic”. Elmer says: “Well-known pillars of society will hold investment portfolios and may include houses, trading companies, artwork, yachts, jewellery, horses, and so on.”
“What I am objecting to is not one particular bank, but a system of structures,” he told the Observer. “I have worked for major banks other than Julius Baer, and the one thing on which I am absolutely clear is that the banks know, and the big boys know, that money is being secreted away for tax-evasion purposes, and other things such as money-laundering – although these cases involve tax evasion.”
Elmer was held in custody for 30 days in 2005, and is charged with breaking Swiss bank secrecy laws, forging documents and sending threatening messages to two officials at Julius Baer.
Elmer says: “I agree with privacy in banking for the person in the street, and legitimate activity, but in these instances privacy is being abused so that big people can get big banking organisations to service them. The normal, hard-working taxpayer is being abused also.
“Once you become part of senior management,” he says, “and gain international experience, as I did, then you are part of the inner circle – and things become much clearer. You are part of the plot. You know what the real products and service are, and why they are so expensive. It should be no surprise that the main product is secrecy … Crimes are committed and lies spread in order to protect this secrecy.”
The names on the CDs will not be made public, just as a much shorter list of 15 clients that Elmer handed to WikiLeaks in 2008 has remained hitherto undisclosed by the organisation headed by Julian Assange, currently on bail over alleged sex offences in Sweden, and under investigation in the US for the dissemination of thousands of state department documents.
Elmer has been hounded by the Swiss authorities and media since electing to become a whistleblower, and his health and career have suffered.
“My understanding is that my client’s attempts to get the banks to act over various complaints he made came to nothing internally,” says Elmer’s lawyer, Jack Blum, one of America’s leading experts in tracking offshore money. “Neither would the Swiss courts act on his complaints. That’s why he went to WikiLeaks.”
That first crop of documents was scrutinised by the Guardian newspaper in 2009, which found “details of numerous trusts in which wealthy people have placed capital. This allows them lawfully to avoid paying tax on profits, because legally it belongs to the trust … The trust itself pays no tax, as a Cayman resident”, although “the trustees can distribute money to the trust’s beneficiaries”.
Now, Blum says, “Elmer is being tried for violating Swiss banking secrecy law even though the data is from the Cayman Islands. This is bold extraterritorial nonsense. Swiss secrecy law should apply to Swiss banks in Switzerland, not a Swiss subsidiary in the Cayman Islands.”
Julius Baer has denied all wrongdoing, and rejects Elmer’s allegations. It has said that Elmer “altered” documents in order to “create a distorted fact pattern”.
The bank issued a statement on Friday saying: “The aim of [Elmer's] activities was, and is, to discredit Julius Baer as well as clients in the eyes of the public. With this goal in mind, Mr Elmer spread baseless accusations and passed on unlawfully acquired, respectively retained, documents to the media, and later also to WikiLeaks. To back up his campaign, he also used falsified documents.”
The bank also accuses Elmer of threatening colleagues.
GORDON DUFF: ADL: WIKILEAKS VITAL TO ISRAEL’S INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM
ADL TO ATTACK JOURNALISTS AND PUBLICATIONS TYING ISRAEL TO WIKILEAKS
By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor
“There is a list, the Bush administration’s “working group” that green-lighted 9/11. Of the five names on it, three are Jews. “
Last week, responding to a deluge of news reports tying Israel to Wikileaks, Julian Assange announced he finally planned to release 3700 cables from the US Embassy in Tel Aviv, documents previously withheld from the public. In a press release, Assange said he planned the “dump” in 6 months but didn’t indicate how many other documents involving Israel were being withheld.
Veterans Today has been informed by sources within the ADL that, in coordination with Julian Assange’s announcement, they were “tasked” by the Tel Aviv government to begin operations against journalists and online publications that had let to Wikileaks being discredited as an Israeli intelligence operation. Sources indicate that Tel Aviv values Wikileaks as a vital asset in molding public opinion and providing cover for high risk operations.
ADL’s website is loading up with warnings and attacks, all defending Wikileaks and Julian Assange and attacking news sources that print materials either critical of Julian Assange or citing Israel’s involvement in Wikileak’s agreement to allow material critical of Israel to be censored.
“If we had Wikileaks up to speed, the Goldstone Report would never have been heard of at all. There isn’t anything that can’t be covered up by a Julian Assange scandal. I just hope something doesn’t come up where it gets so serious that Assange will have to be assassinated. He is really a loveable dupe.” (ADL source)
The ADL source cited publications www.opinion-maker.org and www.veteranstoday.com as the largest threats, followed by author Jeff Gates.
“We know we aren’t going to be able to reach their audience. Our job is to insulate our own base, America’s Jewish population, one increasingly sympathetic to progressive alternative publications. With Israel and President Obama at each others throats and 78% of America’s Jewish population having supported Obama in the presidential election, we could be playing with fire here.” (ADL source)
ISRAEL’S STRATEGY BACKFIRES
It isn’t a very well kept secret that the ADL and AIPAC are agencies of Israeli intelligence. Their litany of transgressions is being dragged into the open by former AIPAC Lobbyist Steve Rosen in his defamation lawsuit against that organization. In 2004, the FBI tried to close AIPAC down for spying, only to see their criminal cases blocked by Bush administration officials.
Now, with the ADL openly going after the press for reporting ties between Julian Assange and Israel and Assange’s agreement to allow Wikileaks to be censored by both Israel and press organizations working with them, has exposed Wikileaks to even more embarrassment.
ADL actions to publicly defend Wikileaks is blowing up in their faces.
“I have no idea what they were thinking back in Tel Aviv. What kind of idiot would try to keep the Wikileaks and Israel thing quiet and then have the ADL run around like maniacs calling people names. The ADL should keep to spray painting swastika’s on synagogues and sending articles to “Stormfront” and leave the thinking to people better equipped, if there still are people like that around….which I am not so sure of.” (ADL source)
9/11, IS THAT THAT WHAT IS BEING HIDDEN?
With 9/11 more and more in the public eye, especially with Fox News and Jesse Ventura’s “Conspiracy Theory” building a powerful case for involvement by the Bush administration in the planning and execution of 9/11 as a “false flag” terror attack, it is likely that Israel feels particularly vulnerable. If a solid tie between Israel and 9/11 is made, Israel will have its first real security problem since 1973.
“I never knew Assange was working for us, not even when he started attacking the 9/11 Truth movement. I really didn’t know for sure until a couple of days ago. As for 9/11, that’s something else. There are a couple of senior guys running around, saying they planned 9/11, not Mossad, military guys. I don’t know if they are bullshitters or not. They say it like this…’Of course, we did it, who else? We don’t care, say whatever you want, who needs to hide anything, we can do whatever we want there’
This is how the put it. I just don’t know what they are saying this or why they are saying it now. What I do know is that this Wikileaks thing, somehow 9/11 may be behind it.
There is a list, the Bush administration’s “working group” that green-lighted 9/11. Of the five names on it, three are Jews. ” (ADL Source)
.
GORDON DUFF: WIKIWEASEL II-THE ALTERNATIVE MEDIA CRUSHES WIKILEAKS
http://www.veteranstoday.com
December 25, 2010 posted by Gordon Duff ·
ASSANGE LASHES OUT, PROMISES ISRAEL “LEAK”…IN 6 MONTHS
By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor
“We know what has been released. The genuinely sensitive material held by Wikileaks, that tying Israel to actions against America in Iraq, tying Israel to the drug trade in Afghanistan and tying Israel to terrorism in Pakistan, have yet to be seen. Will Assange be releasing these reports in 6 months? Why wait that long?”
Julian Assange has lashed out at the independent press for their attacks on the credibility of Wikileaks, particularly after revelations of his associations with, not only the New York Times and the powerful Murdoch media empire, both strong voices for Israel’s Zionist movement, but the Rothschilds family and even, strange as it may seem, billionaire George Soros.
While the mainstream media, now openly admitting their partnership with Wikileaks, has built Assange to “rock star” status, their reporting has systematically censored attacks on Wikileaks by, not only alternative media but governments as well.
Assange’s recent rages at the independent media are a clear indication of the declining status of mainstream press and television as reliable new sources. With 4 out of 5 seeking their news from the Internet and those looking for something other than sports, fashion and gossip, more likely than not moving increasingly toward the alternative press, Wikileaks, now practically a “brand name” for the New York Times and Fox/Murdoch group, is beginning to look, more and more, like a liability.
YouTube – Veterans Today -
These attacks on Assange, citing his seeming pro-Israel bias, one he now openly admits also, soon began coming in from governments, Pakistan and Turkey, major allies of the United States, among others. However, the press never reported them or any of the other accusations of bias. While busily reporting on Assange’s sex life, a version now contradicted as to nature and preferences, the media left out the real heart of the Wikileaks controversy itself, its own role in Wikileaks.
If anything, the New York Times is guilty, not so much of espionage as reported by CBS News, but for misrepresenting their role in Wikileaks.
FILTERING THE UNFILTERED, THE PROPAGANDIZING OF WIKILEAKS
When Assange admitted that materials damaging to Israel were allowed to be removed from Wikileaks by outsiders, The New York Times and unnamed others, he failed to clarify the process used for adding material to Wikileaks. This process is called “seeding.”
When Brzezinski accused Assange of “seeding” Wikileaks with “pointed material” on behalf of an “intelligence agency,” this is the process he was referring to. It isn’t just that Wikileaks protects Israel but that material damaging to Israel’s enemies is now proven to have been chosen specifically.
This won’t be said enough times. When material was added and taken away to serve the purpose of powerful outside groups, in this case, all with powerful Israeli ties, it made Wikileaks an agent of censorship, an agent of propaganda and totally discredited the Wikileaks project.
Dr. Alan Sabrosky cites the following after his analysis of Wikileak material;
“The one striking exception in all of this global tour de farce <sic.> is the Middle East. Certainly, even aside from Wikileaks founder Julian Assange’s fulsome praise of Binyamin Netanyahu, what is said and what is not, represent the message Israel and its partisans in the US Government (itself heavily Zionist and “Israel First” in orientation) want the world to hear, believe and accept. The message coming across in the US diplomatic cables could have been designed and drafted by Avigdor Lieberman, and who knows? It may have been…
No one knows how many groups were given censorship power by Assange or why or what materials were removed, and how embarrassing they would be to Israel. Were there materials on the attack on the Freedom Flotilla or the Goldstone Report? Were there reports on Mordecai Vanunu and Israel’s nuclear program? Did Wikileaks suppress information on how Israel and India have armed Taliban terrorists for attacks inside Pakistan or, far more serious, reports that Israeli sniper teams and other groups, targeting American troops, did so in an attempt to blame Iran and push the United States to war with that nation. Are there reports of Israeli agents planning attacks on US forces in Bahrain in 2007, attacks meant to be blamed on Shiite terrorists allied to Iran? We are told there are and that these reports were removed and withheld.
WHAT WE GOT INSTEAD…
Instead of these reports, the public got these carefully selected and unsubstantiated items:
1. 10th June 2006: Al Qaida in Iraq insurgents plan to attack a forward operating base in Karmah with chemical weapons…The insurgents plan to deploy their chemical weapon using mortars as a delivery system. (Analyst Comments: In Iraq AQI has tried several times to employ chemical weapons against coalition forces).
2. 16th August 2008: CBRN personnel has tested the rounds twice with M8 paper and J CAM. EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal), and chemical recon element assess that the chemical … tested positive for chemical agent. EOD reports 12 x full chemical rounds. 14 x damaged rounds are either leaking or empty. The cache consisted of 26 contaminated rounds and 14 empty 155mm rounds.
3. 13th October 2005: As of late September 2005, Al-Qa’ida in Iraq elements allegedly planned to attack Abu Ghurayb prison in early to mid-October using an unspecified number of mortars and car bombs…. AQIZ elements allegedly planned to use 20 “chemical munitions” brought from Syria.
4. 28th January 2006: The ten are chemical weapons specialists and came to Iraq to support the chemical weapons operations of Hizballah Islam I. (Field comment — The chemical operations of Hizballah Islam I were previously reported as Al Qa’ida Iraq operations, the ten unidentified men are chemical weapons specialists from Syria)…The ten unidentified men were taken to Is’Hagey Iraq, where the unidentified chemicals weapons … are stored. The chemical weapons were brought from Syria to Iraq on 21 January 2006.
5. 29th December 2006: As of 27 December 2006, three unidentified Bedouins who were alleged Iraq AQI Operatives planned to transport chemical munitions from Al Judayda, Saudi Arabia, to Nugra Al Salman District, a border area in Al Muthanna Province, Iraq …Subsequently, Iraq AQI operatives planned use the munitions to attack hospitals, outdoor markets, and US military forces in Al Basrah, Al Amarah and An Nasiriyah on or after 15 January 2007.
6. 5th March 2007: AQI insurgency group is planning a rocket attack on several targets in the Baghdad International Zone and a US base in Al Rashdiyah by using Katusha rockets filled with unknown chemicals… these rockets were described as being three meters long and are modified in order to carry the extra weight. (Field Comment – the source was unable to provide the type of chemical and stated that these rockets probably originated from Iran).
7. 20th September 2007: As of late September 2007, Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) militants in Mosul, Iraq were planning an imminent attack on Tall ‘Afar using rockets with Chlorine gas or another chemical compound … The rockets had a range of more than 20 Kilometers, and an impact radius of 50 to 100 square meters. (Comment: the Arabic word “Sarukh” was used to describe the rockets).
Upon closer examination, each of these reports was shown to be worthless, discarded or downgraded by the US government as “chickenfeed.” The proposed attacks all never happened, the weapons spoken of were never found or used, in fact, the Iraq War Logs were a litany of failure. However, when the press, now shown to have selected the “leaks” in the first place, wrote about their own work, what was “chickenfeed” was spun into powerful accusations, all false, fanciful and reprehensible.
We know what has been released. The genuinely sensitive material held by Wikileaks, that tying Israel to actions against America in Iraq, tying Israel to the drug trade in Afghanistan and tying Israel to terrorism in Pakistan, have yet to be seen. Will Assange be releasing these reports in 6 months? Why wait that long?
PRO-WAR, ANTI-WAR, WILL THE REAL WIKILEAKS PLEASE STAND UP
Assange is pro-war, Assange is a strong “neocon” supporter, Assange has supported Bush administration policies in every way from the mishandling of the 9/11 investigation to the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact, Assange was totally pro-American until the Obama administration began pushing for an end to the forced removal of Palestinians by Israel.
Lila Rajiva, writing for Veterans Today, cited Stewart Bramhill:
So what is the corporate media trying to conceal by beating Assange’s sex life to death?
Most of the information in the recent cables release is already widely available on the Internet.
At the same time I find it surprising to find absolutely nothing about the “strategic” reasons the US is at war in Pakistan and Afghanistan.Nothing about the Pentagon agenda to foster the secession of oil and mineral rich Balochistan from Pakistan as a US client state – just like Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and other former Soviet republics. Nothing about CIA support for the Baloch separatist movement. Nothing about the CIA training young Baloch separatists in bomb making and other terrorist activities to disrupt operations at the Chinese-built Gwadar Port (intended to transport Iranian oil and natural gas via Pakistan to China).
The latest Wikileak has been out a for a month, actually much longer if you are the New York Times or the government of Israel. They had it all from day one. With the US government threatening Julian Assange with prosecution for holding and releasing illegally obtained classified material, why aren’t they going after the real Wikileaks, the New York Times? It only took Zbigniew Brzezinski, Washington’s “establishment” foreign policy expert, a “New York minute” to spot Wikileaks as an intelligence operation, when he informed PBS interviewer Judy Woodruff of this on December 2.
This story wasn’t new. The worst part is that the story was well documented from the first, long ago, but suppressed in the press, now long proven totally complicit, not in choosing what Wikileaks stories to print, but in choosing what Wikileaks intelligence was released to the public. This is what it all comes down to.
WIKILEAKS IS A “PRESS RELEASE,” AND HARDLY A “LEAK” AT ALL
Julian Assange, for some unknown reason, placed full authority for what the public could and couldn’t be trusted with in the hands of the New York Times. Wasn’t Wikileaks set up to attack the press in the first place? Wasn’t it Wikileaks that was telling us, from day one, that the governments were controlling the press, censoring the news and supporting wars?
The whole purpose of Wikileaks was to eliminate and bypass the cabal of corrupt government and controlled press, to empower citizens with real information that was withheld. Instead, Wikileaks became just another government controlled newspaper, and Julian Assange got his daily press conferences, his staged photo shoots and his endless fame, all while covering his complicity in censorship and his relationships with the world’s most powerful and often reviled forces, all advocates of war.
With all the hoopla about opposing war, the majority of Wikileaks documents, certainly the most “pointed” and “seeded” of them, as Brzezinski tells us, are all in support of the wars Julian Assange said he opposed. Other than minor reports outlining the idiocy of the people who wrote the reports, cables or whatever we want to call them, other than proving American diplomats and intelligence officers are typically dupes and clowns, something a decade of war and lies has proven to the world long ago, what, exactly, has Wikileaks done?
Dr. Alan Sabrosky sums it up far better than I could ever do;
But nothing like that is there, or at least has yet surfaced, which makes me increasingly inclined to see this as just another game of rhetorical smoke and mirrors, with a lot of real cables and real victims (like the poor US soldier who presumably gave Assange at least some of the cables), but with many or most of the Middle East cables “cooked” if not fabricated outright.
So these, at least, are probably the handiwork of Israeli-Americans or just Israelis putting their own spin on things, included in a mass of otherwise legitimate cables as camouflage and for validation. An Australian news website concluded that “[the] WikiLeaks cables [are] the 9/11 of world diplomacy.” Too, too true – same source, different vehicle and venue, all helping pave the road to yet another needless war in Israel’s service, this time against Iran. The gods weep — but not, presumably, Yahweh.”
————————————————————————
VETERANS TODAY, WITH PERMISSION FROM JONATHAN AZAZIAH, INCLUDES HIS ANALYSIS OF WIKILEAKS:
Wikileaks Is Zionist Poison II: Deconstruction Of The Myth
by Jonathan Azaziah for www.maskofzion.com and Veterans Today
Israeli Foreknowledge and Arrogance
![]() |
| Red Mafiya Don Semion Mogilevich is left out of Cablegate deliberately. |
Cablegate Fraud I: The Obviousness
![]() |
| Cablegate is nothing but a promotion of Zionist propaganda. |
Cablegate Fraud II: Disgusting Zionist Lies
![]() |
| Both of these nations have been assaulted by Wikileaks. |
Targeted by Zion: Turkey and Iran
![]() |
| Wikileaks is an Israeli-American intelligence operation. |
Wikileaks Exposed: The CIA, Google, PROMIS and More
![]() |
| Julian Assange has been bought and paid for by Israel. |
![]() |
| Resistance and Knowledge will trigger Revolution; not Wikileaks. |
Wikileaks falling apart, Israel finally called out in congress, and other news – Ryan Dawson
Comment :
In this Video Ryan Dawson reflects (for the most) my own personal opinion !
Exclusive: Internet was never free or open and never will be, media studies prof. says
http://www.rawstory.com
Sunday, December 12th, 2010 — 10:33 am
Author: If Americans want a truly free network, ‘we’ve got to build it from scratch’
Secrets outlet WikiLeaks’ continuing struggle to remain online in the face of corporate and government censorship is a striking example of something few truly realize: that the Internet is not and never has been democratically controlled, a media studies professor commented to Raw Story.
“[T]he stuff that goes on on the Internet does not go on because the authorties can’t stop it,” Douglas Rushkoff, author of Program or be Programmed: Ten Commands for a Digital Age and Life, Inc.: How Corporatism Conquered the World and How to Take it Back”, said. “It goes on because the authorities are choosing what to stop and what not to stop.”
Rushkoff told Raw Story that the authorities have the ability to quash cyber dissent due to the Internet’s original design, as a top-down, authoritarian device with a centralized indexing system.
Essentially, all one needs to halt a rogue site is to delete its address from the domain name system registry.
“This is not rocket science,” said Rushkoff, who also teaches media studies at The New School University in Manhattan.
For example, the Dutch teenager arrested Thursday for helping to organize a denial of service attack on an ‘Operation Payback’ online chatroom: “They just took him off. He had his own server, and they just go, ‘Oh, nip this one!’” Rushkoff said.
This is why, he noted in a recent CNN editorial, the actual threat to PayPal, Visa, MasterCard and Amazon last week were “vastly overstated” in most media.
“The forces of bottom-up anarchy have reached a similar impasse, and the authorities of the Internet have once again demonstrated their ability to fend off any genuine peer-to-peer activity,” he explained. “This is a tightly controlled network, and you know, that’s why I think the Chinese do have it right in that they understand, ‘Oh, we can control this thing. We just censor the fuck out of it.”
“[The general public] didn’t realize that the only difference is now we can see that we’ve been censored.”
Rushkoff said that until the recent WikiLeaks attacks, no one has talked about plans to create truly democratic, peer-to-peer alternatives to the Internet’s centralized domain index since political activist Paul Garrin’s work in the mid-to-late 1990s.
Garrin’s anti-trust lawsuit NAME.SPACE v. Network Solutions, Inc. paved the way to lower domain registration costs by breaking up the monopoly-based domain name registration system into a wholesale-retail market.
“What [Garrin] showed was that if you don’t want to use the domain name servers that are officially in charge of the net, you can create your own network of domain name servers,” Rushkoff explained.
“You can set up your computer to look them up instead of the official ones where we can create our own names database, so I could be ‘Douglas.Rushkoff,’” he said. “You know, we could have any name we want. It’s arbitrary and artificial that they’ve limited domain at top-level registers to what they have. I mean, they have their reasons for it, of course, but it’s artificial.”
Most people, he said, would rather “just stream Steve Jobs’ authorized movies” than connect to an open public space that would almost certainly become demonized as a haven for terrorism and lawlessness.
“If we want to have a true peer-to-peer network, we now understand what it might look like,” Rushkoff said. ”If you want to have something real, we’ve got to build it from scratch.”
With editing by Stephen C. Webster.
.
Wikileaks Founder: Bigger Bombshells On The Way
“Thank you Alex ,you will allways be one of my favorites ,keep rocking”! :
http://www.infowars.com
Cryptome.org’s John Young, “the original Wikileaker,” warns that Assange is being set up to be the fall guy for a massive lurch towards Internet censorship

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Friday, December 10, 2010
One of the original members of Wikileaks warns that a series of bigger bombshell revelations are in the pipeline and that the growing crisis being contrived around the group and its figurehead Julian Assange is greasing the skids for the cybersecurity agenda to regulate and censor the world wide web.
Cryptome.org founder John Young, who the New York Observer recently characterized as “the original Wikileaker,” told the Alex Jones Show how he volunteered to register Wikileaks.org in December 2007 under his name for Wikileaks members who wanted to remain anonymous, with the understanding that the site was merely for the public benefit. Young became suspicious when he was subsequently told that the aim was to raise $5 million dollars within the first six months.
“I said wait a minute, that doesn’t sound like public benefit to me, that sounds like a high value funded program,” said Young, likening the scenario to a George Soros-style outfit.
“This was a business operation not a public benefit operation and it’s turned out to be that,” said Young, concurring with the fact that Wikileaks was introduced into the public arena by Cass Sunstein in a Washington Post editorial. This is important because in a 2008 white paper, Sunstein, who is now Obama’s White House information czar, argued that government entities should pose as “conspiracy theorists” as part of a clandestine plot to discredit independent media voices and ultimately demolish free speech on the Internet.
Young said that Wikileaks provided the perfect pretext for government to raise funds for a cybersecurity infrastructure that would eventually be used to silence free speech and regulate the Internet.
“Some of the enthusiasts for Wikileaks seem to be operating in concert with some of its opponents, it looks like they’re in lock step to me,” said Young, noting that the whole fiasco was a display of theatre designed to test whether the cybersecurity agenda is ready to get traction. Given the fact that establishment Republicans are already introducing legislation aimed at criminalizing Wikileaks, circumstances clearly indicate that the crisis is being exploited to push Internet censorship.
Although George Soros’ Open Society Institute denies having any connection to Wikileaks, Young personally had conversations with Wikileaks founders who told him of their efforts to secure funding from the organization, at which point Young resigned from Wikileaks. Young said that Wikileaks were all but bankrupt when they were operating on their own but have now “raised millions by being on the inside.
As to who is actually behind Wikileaks aside from Assange himself, Young pointed to a Wikipedia list of “Cypherpunks,” Internet gurus, some of whom now hold prominent positions in major technology companies, who were responsible for a mailing list that started in 1992 for people interested in privacy and cryptography.
Young said that Wikileaks was not an independent organization nor one controlled by government, but instead a “concept, an aspiration, a goal….not anything you’re going to be able to take down by the usual means,” which is why Young predicts Wikileaks will not be taken down. However, he cautioned that Wikileaks now redacting documents was a sign that they have been co-opted to a large extent.
“If you were offered a million dollar bribe and you were 39-years-old and had no other income, think about it, it’s called a government contract,” said Young, alleging that Assange has been bought off.
“I expect there will be a continuing crisis raised by the Wikileaks model,” said Young, adding that increasingly damaging documents will continue to be released and that this will enable both dissidents like Assange as well as governments to accrue both power and increased funding.
“It’ll be kept going for quite a while, money’s pouring in from all sides,” said Young, adding that the situation was being escalated into a “war-like crisis” so the US government could milk cyber-threats to beef their own authority.
Stock up for the Holidays with eFoods Direct and get FREE Shipping!
“Right now they’re just testing the public’s reaction with this low-level secrecy revelation, but the other stuff will come,” said Young, pointing out that just because the cables released thus far were classified as secret didn’t mean they were true. Indeed, many of the cables bolster discredited rhetoric about the war on terror and do little to harm US imperial objectives because they mainly consist of material that arises out of the echo chamber of geopolitical propaganda.
Young predicts that a “series of bombshells” will continue to emerge both from Wikileaks and about its founder Julian Assange, specifically in relation to the bogus rape charges against him, and that we’re only being “teased” at the moment and much more interesting material is in the pipeline, which Young went on to list;
- Information about the internal affairs of Bank of America
- Files on weapons of mass destruction
- War plans of all nations, for and against one another
- Reports and training literature on black site prisons and torture chambers
- Files about clandestine spy agencies and their operatives
- Files on human rights abuses
- Files about billionaire political meddlers
- Files about global tax collection agencies
- Files about the Vatican’s meddling in global political affairs
- Information about the Clinton Foundation, although this was the only one on which Young wasn’t certain.
Watch the full interview with John Young below.
.
related :
Wikileaks donations going well despite Visa, Mastercard shutdown
.
Visa and Mastercard are happy to transfer donations to the Ku Klux Klan, but not WikiLeaks
War in Context
http://www.uruknet.info/?new=72698
War in Context, December 9, 2010
Visa Europe has begun suspending payments to whistle-blowing website Wikileaks ahead of carrying out an investigation into the organisation.
It follows a similar move by rival payments processor Mastercard on Tuesday.
Charles Arthur, the Guardian’s technology editor, points out that while MasterCard and Visa have cut WikiLeaks off you can still use those cards to donate to overtly racist organisations such as the Knights Party, which is supported by the Ku Klux Klan.
The Ku Klux Klan website directs users to a site called Christian Concepts. It takes Visa and MasterCard donations for users willing to state that they are “white and not of racially mixed descent. I am not married to a non-white. I do not date non-whites nor do I have non-white dependents. I believe in the ideals of western Christian civilisation and profess my belief in Jesus Christ as the son of God.”
.
Firefighters For 9/11 Truth Debunk Assange (VIDEO)
http://poorrichards-blog.blogspot.com
By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor veteranstoday.com
One of the many groups of dedicated professionals insulted by Julian Assange is “Firefighters for 9/11 Truth.” This is their video. Assange says they are liars but even Fox News now admits that Building 7 was destroyed by explosives.
Assange staked the reputation of Wikileaks on the public never learning about Building 7. Who would want to silence the biggest controversy in history? Why is Julian Assange doing this? Who is he?
Architects and Engineers, Pilots, Military and Intelligence Officers, tens of thousands of America’s finest and most dedicated professionals have, for years, risked their careers and reputations to defend their country, really defend the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Julian Assange has attacked them relentlessly.
Those who fight for truth are my heroes as were the first responders who died on 9/11.
Honor them.
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
related :
WikiLeaks ‘Struck A Deal With Israel’ Over Diplomatic Cable Leaks
.
The Baby and the Bathwater – Wiki-Leaks and the Principle of Truth
As our readers know, Sott.net doesn’t always take the easy path, but we do try to take the right path and we don’t like to get egg on our faces. If we think we are right in the face of all opposition, we’ll stick to our guns. By the same token, if we discover we have made an error, we admit and correct it. We don’t like to have to admit and correct errors and so, we try to avoid making them.
There’s an old saying: ‘Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater’ and never was that saying more à propos than the current Wikileaks/Julian Assange situation. This saying is particularly relevant in respect of those who deride Wikileaks and Assange, and point out the many problems that this situation presents to the careful thinker and researcher. And here, we include ourselves at Sott.net to some extent. We have had to sit down and discuss and think about this issue long and hard and the following is the outcome of that reflection.
First of all, Sott.net has friends who have taken positions on both sides of the issue — friends whose opinions we respect and, more than that, we understand them. We have questioned the Assange supporters closely and even they admit that the content of the leaks is certainly not what one would wish. One of them pointed out that diplomatic cables are not likely to contain any real dirty secrets other than the standard duplicity of diplomacy since what diplomats think or know is only what is fed to them by intelligence agencies. All you can learn from diplomatic cables is how they are going about advancing the agendas of their governments — agendas that are operative but cannot be openly declared. In short, noticing that the agenda is to set up Iran for attack, or Pakistan, from diplomatic cables is just what one would expect. As one pundit wrote disparagingly:
“Meanwhile, the organization has certainly discovered the art of over-promising, the latest Cablegate docs being a prime example. If there’s anything scandalous in them, it’s that the US government isn’t evil enough. There’s no talk of toppling foreign governments. No examples of breaking international law. No assassination talk. Nothing. Of course if you didn’t bother to read any details, you’d think there had been some massive breach of America’s dirtiest secrets that ripped the veil off the cloak and dagger world of the US diplomatic corps (of course, US politicians calling Wikileaks a “terrorist” organization only help to blow the docs out of proportion).”
All you are seeing in these cables is naked pathology in action: you can get a good idea about how this works from reading Wikleaks and Imperial Mobilization – The CIA’s “Mighty Wurlitzer”. But, as one of our researchers has pointed out, since we are developing pretty good ideas about how the PTB (Powers That Be) operate through the intelligence community, we would postulate that even the CIA doesn’t know what their own agency does or knows. Compartmentalization is the name of the game. A recent two year study by the Washington Post found that the American national security apparatus is “so large, so unwieldy and so secretive that no-one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employs, how many programs exist within it, or exactly how many agencies do the same work”. Therefore, it is highly likely that both the diplomatic corps and most of the CIA have no idea to what extent they are used as pawns in a bigger game.
Then, of course, there is what the MSM (mainstream media) is doing with the leaks. Well, are we surprised? This is the same MSM that sold us the lies that led to the Iraq invasion and is owned by the Zionists just as the CIA is owned by the Zionists. (Keep in mind that Zionists do not necessarily represent Jews but certainly do find friendly bedfellows with the Nazi secret services imported into the U.S. under Project Paperclip and whose ideologies — and personalities – became the driving forces for American Secret State policies.)
State Department or diplomatic corps communication leaks are probably not the best place to find much damaging information. Diplomats are used and duped more often than not when the ‘Secret Team’ involves them in their fun and games.
So we can pretty much dismiss the leaked documents themselves and how they are being handled by the MSM as mostly disinformation and propaganda and spin. We can even speculate that no leak ever happens without an agenda behind it, and this batch of leaks is no different. But that doesn’t mean it always has to be that way, and this is where we come to Julian Assange and his vision. At this point, we want to share with you a little bit of the struggles we went through to come to the ideas we’re going to express here. We need to think first about Truth. Allow us to quote a bit from Ernest Gellner’s Anthropology and Politics:
Jean-Paul Sartre’s Huis Clos (No Way Out) is an account of a triangular situation in which three characters are so related to each other that each one of them can both thwart another and yet is also doomed to be thwarted. A kind of three-pronged stalemate is the consequence. Not one of the participants can break out of the situation, but none is allowed even to attain the peace of resignation. They are doomed to torment and be tormented. It is in this kind of context that Sartre comes to make the celebrated observation that hell is other people.
When it comes to the modern attitude to truth, it does seem that the contemporary situation is triangular, somewhat in this manner.
There are three principal contestants, roughly equidistant from each other. No single one is able to secure a really convincing ascendancy over the others, and liberate himself from the self-image-corroding taunts of at least one other member of the triad. It is all a little like the children’s game of scissors, paper, stone: scissors cut paper, paper covers stone, stone blunts scissors.
Gellner goes on to describe his three way stalemate as occurring between Relativists, Fundamentalists, and “Enlightenment Puritans”. In his book, Postmodernism, Reason and Religion he describes the latter as Enlightened Rationalist Fundamentalists which we will refer to as ERFs.
The Relativists reject the very idea of Truth since everything is relative to the observer, so to say. They actually believe in “belief” itself, devoid of content. They are against the idea of revealed truth that is singular and all-encompassing, but rather advocate the validity of all “truths” and points of view. The pursuit of any transcending truth is damned in their eyes. Anyone who disputes them is in peril of being damned for a colonialist, patriarchalist, or imperialist. Unfortunately, they become very “fundamentalist” about this — their Relativism is the Truth – which leads us, of course, to the Fundamentalists.
The Fundamentalists promote the Truth, but it is revealed truth from their god and, since they come in different flavors, there are different gods and different revealed truths, each adhered to by the given Fundamentalist with a death grip that can mean death for many others who do not subscribe to their particular beliefs.
The thing is, the Fundamentalists have a point against the Relativists: the Relativists position is not serious or consistent, nor is it capable of endowing anyone with genuine moral convictions. Our world is, indeed, a plural one, but it is based on the uniqueness of Truth as a value, something to be sought, not something to be claimed as “owned.” This brings us to the Enlightenment/Rationalist Fundamentalists.
The Enlightened Rationalist Fundamentalist (ERF) is one who thinks that Science (selecting that option with the highest probability based on observation and experiment as opposed to considering all options as equally valid via belief) is the cognitive path toward Truth and, at the same time, is convinced by the path of reason that Truth — with a capital T — does exist even if we aren’t there yet. The Enlightened Rationalist is convinced that Truth, as the ideal, can be unique and is definitely important which is the Fundamentalist view. However, the ERF is more careful and fastidious in identifying the truth that deserves respect (i.e. selecting the probability).
The ERF is not interested or tempted by the solipsistic relativistic position though he appreciates the tolerance that it recommends (at least in theory) because that tolerance is at the basis of making many observations and experiments before arriving at a conclusion about probabilities. The ERF, while sharing with the Fundamentalist the idea that the ideal of Truth is real and to be striven for, rejects the idea that he possesses it or that he even can possess it. He only knows that there are procedures for investigating the world that have positive and beneficial results: all ideas, data, inquirers are equal at the beginning and all cognitive claims must collect and analyze data on terms of equality, and no circular, self-confirming visions are allowed, but in the end, there is a conclusion that, at least until new data contradicts it, trumps all other visions. You could say that the ERF has a religious nature divorced from blind belief and that this inspires him or her to orderly conduct for its own sake.
Unfortunately, the ERF lives in a world that is too abstract to appeal to the average person — to the masses — and it is definitely not a cognitive style that sustains one emotionally in crisis. The idea that even-handed handling of evidence, careful collection of data and even more careful analysis, leads to a correct understanding of the world around us while admitting that it is only a process and our understanding today may change with the addition of new data, isn’t much to warm the heart of those ruled by passion, nor does it provide clear rules for behaving with dignity in difficult or tragic situations. Most people can’t live in a state of ambiguity.
In short: “The Fundamentalist and the [ERF] share a sense of and respect for the uniqueness of truth; the [ERF] and the Relativist share a penchant for tolerance; and the Relativist and the Fundamentalist share a reasonably well furnished, habitable world, as opposed to the arid emptiness of the ambiguous world of the ERF. The Relativist even has access to a whole set of exotic worlds which are at the same time discreetly connected to all modern conveniences.” (Gellner)
So, if you take the above discussion about different, fundamental ways to view Truth and the pursuit of same, and add in psychopathology, well, you can see how difficult this situation with Wikileaks and Julian Assange can be for different people. Any one of the three main positions can be degraded by pathological cognition.
So, taking all the data and observations into consideration, what comes out as the most likely probability? (By the very fact that we are analyzing this problem this way reveals our own position as very close to that of the ERF crowd.)
Okay, let’s deal with the fact that Julian Assange doesn’t seem to be the brightest light bulb in the pack when it comes to analyzing raw data. As one highly respected and well-known 9-11 researcher of the ERF ilk wrote to us yesterday:
Just the fact Assange refers to 9/11 truth as “nonsense” says it all, I think. The guy simply is too smart not to have figured it out soon after it happened. His “leaks” are carefully crafted to a) keep the public focus away from the growing awareness of the 9/11 coverup, and b) to work on the sheeple, subliminally, with the logic, “If there were anything at all to 9/11, these guys would have surely blown the lid.”
Let’s face it: 9/11 Truth would be the ultimate leak. Ergo, people are being led to believe that if “hundreds of thousands of documents” contain not a shred of evidence of 9/11 being an inside job, all truthers must be nutters.
9/11 is everything. In the grand scheme of things, nothing else really matters. Expose 9/11, and the whole house of cards instantly crumbles.
While we agree that the Truth about 9-11 (not manipulated diplomatic correspondence about it) is everything in terms of the Ultimate Leak, we don’t agree that Assange should be required to be a 9-11 Truther or a data analyst to be an activist for Truth and Transparency in government.
On the one hand, many people are being put in an impossible situation. If you come out in support of Assange, are you supporting the lies in the leaks, the drive to war, etc? That’s how it feels to many people. But on the other hand, if you don’t support him, you are basically acting against the principles of free speech, transparency in government, the “little guy” against the Fascist behemoth, and are supporting the destruction of all our freedoms.
Regarding Assange, personally, knowing what we know about spin, it’s very hard to tell when the MSM is putting words in his mouth or not reporting exactly what he says, or does and the context. On the other hand, with Wikileaks itself, and his “representatives,” he does seem to have ample outlets for getting his thoughts and ideas across in the event the MSM is misrepresenting him. That being said, the result of the play of these elements is that he is not terribly attractive as a spokesperson.
Nevertheless, it’s pretty clear that the Swedish prosecution is a cooked up load of harassment and he deserves protection from that nonsense, but on the other hand, Assange does come across as pretty crass and that turns off both the Fundamentalists and the Enlightened Rationalist Fundamentalists! He is, in their eyes, neither morally upright nor fastidious in his handling of data.
The thing is, the idea of Wikileaks is great in principle and that’s what makes this so darned difficult: Assange is the spokesperson for an idea whose time has come, but the leaked material he is representing is not worth dying for. In short, Assange and the propaganda within the leaks are the bathwater, the public right to expose government corruption is the baby.
So the point is this: the principle is worth everything to all of us, here and now. As John Naughton wrote in the Guardian yesterday:
[Wikileaks] represents the first really sustained confrontation between the established order and the culture of the internet. There have been skirmishes before, but this is the real thing. …
What Wikileaks is really exposing is the extent to which the western democratic system has been hollowed out. In the last decade its political elites have been shown to be incompetent (Ireland, the US and UK in not regulating banks); corrupt (all governments in relation to the arms trade); or recklessly militaristic (the US and UK in Iraq). And yet nowhere have they been called to account in any effective way. Instead they have obfuscated, lied or blustered their way through. And when, finally, the veil of secrecy is lifted, their reflex reaction is to kill the messenger.
“Disclosure is messy and tests moral and legal boundaries. It is often irresponsible and usually embarrassing. But it is all that is left when regulation does nothing, politicians are cowed, lawyers fall silent and audit is polluted. Accountability can only default to disclosure.” What we are hearing from the enraged officialdom of our democracies is mostly the petulant screaming of emperors whose clothes have been shredded by the net.
Which brings us back to the larger significance of this controversy. The political elites of western democracies have discovered that the internet can be a thorn not just in the side of authoritarian regimes, but in their sides too. It has been comical watching them and their agencies stomp about the net like maddened, half-blind giants trying to whack a mole. It has been deeply worrying to watch terrified internet companies — with the exception of Twitter, so far — bending to their will.
But politicians now face an agonising dilemma. The old, mole-whacking approach won’t work. Wikileaks does not depend only on web technology. Thousands of copies of those secret cables — and probably of much else besides — are out there, distributed by peer-to-peer technologies like BitTorrent. Our rulers have a choice to make: either they learn to live in a Wikileakable world, with all that implies in terms of their future behaviour; or they shut down the internet.
Yeah, somebody leaked some low-level diplomatic cables full of chaff and the MSM is having a field day, but it is how we respond to the act of leaking and the one who has the courage to stand up to the Fascists that will determine if anyone is going to be courageous enough in the future to leak something that really matters. We don’t have to like or agree with what has been leaked, we don’t have to like or agree with Julian as a person, but we must defend Julian and activists and hacktivists, or we are doomed.
Yes, it’s possible that the whole thing was set up with no single way out for anyone or maybe it just happened that way because different people have different cognitive styles. Either way, we cannot allow it to further divide those who seek truth and Truth. It’s a certainty that no one else has stepped up to the plate and put themselves on the line as Julian Assange has. Maybe he’s mad, and maybe it takes somebody who is a little mad to demonstrate that kind of courage. That doesn’t matter right now. The world is rapidly descending into a different, more dangerous madness and if it takes a Vendetta to start the pendulum swinging in the other direction, so be it.
Because, in the end, it is the principle that the people are entitled to the Truth that matters and that is what is at stake here.
Busted – Wikileaks Working For Israel
http://www.sott.net
Assange Accused: “Took Money From Israel”
Reports have come in today, tying Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, directly to Israeli intelligence and “Israel friendly” media outlets. We are told Assange, while at a Geneva meeting, agreed to allow Israel to select or censor all Wikileak output.
Despite the dramatic arrest of Julian Assange for rape, a story long hyped by the media, Assange “the martyr” now appears to be Assange “the Israeli spy.” Reports from inside Wikileaks differ greatly from the image presented by the press, an Assange tied to ultra-nationalist Israeli groups, an Assange with an extremist agenda, an Assange who sees himself as a geopolitical player, willing to censor, willing to fabricate and willing to betray.
The new Assange, as recent revelations reveal, may very well be capable, with help from Israel and powerful media friends, of staging a phony arrest. The new Assange may also be absolutely guilty of real sex crimes, and not a martyr at all.
The look “behind the curtain” at Wikileaks we have been given shows us a Julian Assange capable of anything, now labeled a paid Israeli agent by multiple press sources around the world.
Neocon Threats on Fox News “Part of the Act”
The latest pro-Israel “Neocon” to attack Assange on the very pro-Israel Fox network is Newt Gingrich.
When I saw Newt Gingrich, Neocon hardliner with a closet full of skeletons, on Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano, something was terribly wrong. Gingrich was threatening Julian Assange, who had, only that day, praised Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News and long time patron of Gingrich.
I immediately smelled a setup.
There is a problem with all this. Both Assange and Gingrich are virtual “stepchildren” of Rupert Murdoch, his followers, his acolytes, and, despite the “bad boy” Assange persona, political twins. Assange, at heart, is everything but progressive and open. Assange, as described by those around him, is a dictator, manipulator and allied to wealth and power.
Newt Gingrich was on a mission, he and other Neocons along with Fox’s Bill O’Reilly, all pouring threats at Assange to build “his” credibility on the basis of the total lack of theirs.
Then the Shoe Drops On Assange
Today we learn that Assange is also a creature of Israel, bankrolled by spies, running a disinformation site with help from Fox News, The New York Times and other media giants. A confirmed news story from the IndyPress has Assange in bed with Israeli intelligence;
“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.”
Assange and 9/11
More importantly, Wikileaks has never had a document mentioning the 9/11 investigation, the controversy over the “9/12″ secret flight to Israel or the “dancing Israeli’s,” the 5 Mossad agents arrested on the George Washington bridge on 9/11 in a van with 2,000 pounds of explosives. This group, admittedly “documenting” the 9/11 attack for the Israeli government was kept in custody for 10 months and only released after diplomatic wrangling and a major lobbying effort.
Hundreds of cables were generated by this issue and thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, tied to 9/11. All magically disappeared at the hands of Julian Assange whose public statements on 9/11 now make him suspect.
The Wikileaks Dictatorship
Inside the Wikileaks organization, Assange’s secret deals are seen as a betrayal. Assange is described as dictatorial and secretive, with a lot to be secret about.
“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 fulfill WikiLeaks’s original aim of “limitless file sharing.”
Mr. Domscheit-Berg, who is about to publish a book about his days Inside WikiLeaks, accuses Assange of acting as a “king” against the will of others in the organisation by “making deals” with media organisations that are meant to create an explosive effect, which others in WikiLeaks either know little or nothing about.”
Wikileaks and Tel Aviv
Payoffs by Israel to Assange had, until today, been an issue of debate among journalists.
Following the leak (and even before), Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a press conference that Israel had “worked in advance” to limit any damage from leaks, adding that “no classified Israeli material was exposed by WikiLeaks.” In an interview with the Time magazine around the same time, Assange praised Netanyahu as a hero of transparency and openness!
Assange, “The Cardboard Lothario”
Yesterday, something odd happened in Britain. Julian Assange was arrested on charges that seem bizarre, under circumstances that discredit the legal system of Sweden. The alleged victims have been cited by the world press as CIA agents in more than one story and the case itself shows obvious signs of tampering, maybe to harass Assange or maybe, based on bizarre timing, to help sell Wikileak data that is increasingly looking like an Israeli intelligence scam.
Today, Julian Assange, “bad boy,” hacker, accused rapist, threatened by American neo-cons with contract killing, authors and op-ed for The Australian, Rupert Murdoch’s flagship publication in Australia.
His article cites Murdoch as his inspiration. A day later, we learn that Assange was working, not just for Israeli ultranationalist Murdoch but for the Israel government as well.
An Israeli Psy-Op?
All three, Gingrich, Assange and Murdoch have several things in common. All are avid Zionists, supporters of Israel’s expansion. Murdoch, Australian born of a Jewish mother, is an Israeli citizen and the powerful guiding force behind the ultranationalist Likudist Party, the hardliners pushing to dispossess Palestine’s non-Jewish population, Israel’s anti-American political wing.
Assange, we know nothing of him other than the rumors and myths, now all brought into serious question.
Gingrich’s move to “the darkside” traces back to the beginnings of his political career.
A Gingrich Path
In 1994, Gingrich’s wife, Marianne, was hired by the Israel Export Development Company. This was while her husband, Congressman Newt Gingrich had just announced support for that company’s free trade zone in Israel. Gingrich had already established himself as “fair game” after a series of ethics and IRS investigations involving the GOPAC organization and its questionable financial practices. (1)
Both articles, exposing the Gingrich/Israel connection were in the Wall Street Journal, a newspaper later purchased by Murdoch, a paper unlikely to carry such as story ever again.
Soon afterward, Newt was called on to aid Murdoch in an FCC complaint made by NBC. They contended that foreign ownership of Fox, Murdoch was not an American, was illegal. Murdoch then gave Gingrich $4.5 million through his publishing company, Harper Collins, to write a book. Murdoch had offered similar deals to Margaret Thatcher and other politicians where Murdoch had regulatory problems. This time, when Newt was found to be meeting with Murdoch’s lobbyists, it all blew up in his face and he was forced to give the money back.
When it came down to “splainin’ time,” Newt and Murdoch denied it all, then it came out that they met secretly on a park bench. Then they claimed Murdoch’s agent, Lynn Chu and Gingrich’s “associate” Jeff Eisenach had cut the deal and forgot to tell them about it. Rupert Murdoch got to keep Fox News and the Neocons gained control of content, making Fox the unofficial voice of Israel, the Republican Party and the military/industrial complex.
Thus began the Gingrich/Murdoch partnership which continues to this day. (2)
The Neocon Charade
Separating myth from reality, real “Wikileaks” from the “Franken-Wikileaks” of Israel and Julian Assange, is going to be difficult.
Where the Swedish government may really be after Assange, it is obvious that the parade of Neocon politicians and media pundits, all “creatures” of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire, are not.
The same media that worked with Assange to censor and manipulate Wikileaks for the Netanyahu government in Israel is the same media, the same outlets, the same ownership, the same management that are now pouring out threats, demands for “hanging.”
Seldom is such a scenario successfully exposed, particularly of such complexity. First Wikileaks source is tied to AIPAC, the Israeli lobby in the United States, through information leaked in a private lawsuit.
Then we learn Assange is, not only working directly for Israel, but is closely aligned with the Murdoch media empire that is managing the most violent criticism of Wikileaks.
Will there be an end to this, a “not so innocent” side show that may well have been put together to push the world into its last war?
Wikileaks once had much promise. It can again.
Sources:
(1) “Gingrich Aided Export Firm That Employed His Wife”, NY Times News Service, San Francisco Chronicle, February 7, 1995 pA7
(1) “Gingrich, Critic of ‘Business as Usual,’ Helps Out Special Interests Like ‘Any Member of Congress’”, Phil Kuntz, Wall Street Journal, April 3, 1995 pA16
(2) “Gingrich’s political education”, Jeff Gerth and Stephen Labaton (NY Times News Service), San Francisco Examiner, February 12, 1995 pA6
(2) “IRS clears Gingrich donation that led to his House censure”, Capitol Hill Blue Website, February 4, 1999
(2) “Ethics Committee Drops Last of 84 Charges Against Gingrich”, By Curt Anderson (Associated Press), Washington Post, October 11, 1998, Page A13
(2) “Use of Tax-Exempt Groups Integral to Political Strategy”, by Charles R. Babcock, Washington Post, January 7, 1997, Page A01
(2) “Jump-Start: How Speaker Gingrich Grabbed Power and Attention So Quickly”, Wall Street Journal, January 19, 1995 pA1
(2) “The Inner Quest of Newt Gingrich”, Gail Sheehy, Vanity Fair, September 1995 p147 “Gingrich, Murdoch reveal lobbyist’s role at meeting”, Katharine Seelye (NY Times News Service), San Francisco Examiner, pA1 “Murdoch, Gingrich Admit They Talked”, San Francisco Chronicle, January 13, 1995
(2) “The Mysterious Mrs. Newt”, Martin Fletcher (London Times News Service), SF Examiner, January 15, 1995 pA4 “Newt’s Near Misses”, Ron Curran, The Bay Guardian, January 11, 1995 p10
(2) “Newt, Inc.”, Dennis Bernstein, Bay Guardian, February 1, 1995 p19
PayPal says it stopped Wikileaks payments on US letter
related :
The curious sex case against Julian Assange
‘All-Out Cyber War’ Erupts Over WikiLeaks: ‘Anonymous’ Hackers Take MasterCard Offline
org. art. starts here :
http://www.uruknet.info
BBC News
December 8, 2010
PayPal has said that its decision to stop people from using its service to make donations to Wikileaks was made after a letter from the US government.
A vice-president at the online payments firm said the State Department had said that the activities of the website were illegal in the US.
PayPal suspended payments to Wikileaks last week, and has been followed by Visa Europe and Mastercard.
Amazon and Swiss bank PostFinance have also cut ties with Wikileaks.
PayPal’s vice-president Osama Bedier told a conference that the company’s acceptable use policy group had decided to suspend Wikileaks’ account after the State Department sent a letter on 27 November, adding that it was a “straightforward” decision.
The company, which is owned by US online auction giant eBay, later clarified that Mr Bedier’s comments referred to a letter sent from the State Department to Wikileaks, not directly to Paypal.
A State Department official also said the government department had not contacted Paypal.
US Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs Philip Crowley tweeted: “The US government did not write to PayPal requesting any action regarding #WikiLeaks. Not true.”
Legal threat
On Tuesday, Mastercard said that it was suspending payments to Wikileaks “until the situation is resolved”.
Datacell says Visa and Mastercard’s decisions could harm its own business This was followed by Visa Europe on Wednesday, which said it would be carrying out an investigation into the whistle-blowing website.
Visa Europe said it wanted to determine whether the nature of Wikileaks’ business “contravenes Visa operating rules”.
Both companies are now facing the threat of legal action from the IT company that enables Wikileaks to accept credit and debit card donations.
Swiss-based Datacell said it would move immediately to try to force Visa Europe and Mastercard to resume allowing payments to the whistle-blowing website.
Datacell claimed in its statement that Visa had come under political pressure and had “put priority on political influence over the law”.
It added that the credit card company’s actions were harming both Datacell and Wikileaks.
A spokeswoman for Visa Europe said it would not be making any comment regarding Datacell at this time. Mastercard has also yet to make a statement on the matter.
Mastercard has, however, commented on claims that pro-Wikileaks internet hackers had brought down its website.
Mastercard said there was “no impact” on people’s ability to use their cards for transactions.
Datacell’s chief executive Andreas Fink urged Visa to “just simply do their business where they are good at – transferring money”.
Datacell added that the suspension would last for an initial seven days, but this has yet to be confirmed by Visa Europe.
The founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange, was arrested in London on Tuesday, connected to sexual assault allegations in Sweden.
He was refused bail, but has vowed to fight extradition.
.
Wikileaks: Iran Selectively Targeted by Media
Gareth Porter is a historian and investigative journalist on US foreign and military policy analyst. He writes regularly for Inter Press Service on US policy towards Iraq and Iran. Author of four books, the latest of which is “Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam”.
Wikileaks: Getting serious for a moment ( filed under “tired of Wi-kill-leaks allready”)
There is something very few people in the blogosphere seem to taking into account in talking about Wikileaks. Right now we are living a moment of tremendous economic instability and turbulence… not to mention two wars running and two more (Iran and Korea) waiting in the wings, world food prices are rising… it goes on and on. Bad times, the worst times since the 1930s, and you may remember how they ended.
Obviously this is a moment where those who have been chosen (democratically or otherwise) to take decisions which affect the lives, income and welfare of millions of people should be able to communicate frankly and calmly with each other and reach agreements quickly.
To put it mildly, people like Julian Assange or Glenn Beck are not helpful right now. To tolerate them is frivolous.
What irritates me especially in the middle of all this is the monumental incoherence and myopia of those who applaud and enable the tactics of Wikileaks.
If the powerful of the world are as evil, brutal, venal and unscrupulous as the Wikileaks data-dump makes them out to be… and they could be all of that, and much, much worse, do you think that they are just going to sit back quietly and watch while the “truth” sets us “free”?
Only a fool could believe that.
This is like going up to a Mafia hit-man and squirting him with a water pistol.
What we are going to get from this, minimally, is an “Official Secrets Act” like the British have and if that don’t get it, there will be legislation passed that, if necessary, will rival “China’s Great Firewall”… don’t doubt if for a minute. And I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if the Newspapers that are publishing the material come to regret having done so.
Remember that Wilson passed the Sedition Act of 1918, and that Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War.
But we are not really at war, you say.
No problem, a Gulf of Tonkin provocation is engineered and we actually declare war on Iran.
But that would have terrible consequences, you say, it would damage the economy and many people would die.
Don’t think for a minute that the people who started such a war would lose money on the deal or send their sons to fight in it.
I would like a revolution as much as the next man, but Wikileaks isn’t going to bring a revolution, it is going to bring a counterrevolution… And that may be what is behind it all in the first place.
WikiLeaks cables claim Iran procures uranium in Latin America
.
Former Pakistani General: CIA, Mossad behind WikiLeaks Reports
http://www.infowars.com
FARS News Agency
December 1, 2010
A former Pakistani army commander said that the disclosure of classified documents by the whistleblower site of Wikileaks is a US plot to create rift among friendly and neighboring states.
“The US has a hand in this plot, and these reports (posted by the WikiLeaks website) are part of the US psychological warfare,” former Chief of the Staff of the Pakistani Army General Mirza Aslam Beg told FNA in Islamabad on Tuesday.
He stated that the US could prevent the leak of information if it wanted to do so, and warned that the real plot and conspiracy pursued by these reports will be unraveled in future.
Aslam Beg further reiterated that the CIA and Israel’s spy agency Mossad have launched efforts to weaken and destabilize Pakistan, and WikiLeaks reports are part of these efforts.
The remarks by the Pakistani figure came after US embassy cables posted by WikiLeaks website sparked hot reactions in the region.
In one cable, the WikiLeaks claimed, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah, a close ally of Pakistan, reportedly called Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari the main cause of his country’s woes.
Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)
Pakistani President’s office responded on Monday that the leaks were “no more than an attempt to create misperceptions between two important and brotherly Muslim countries”.
.
Turkey : PM Erdoğan vows to pursue legal action against WikiLeaks claims
![]() |
|
| PM Erdoğan has not only vehemently denied allegations that he owns secret Swiss bank accounts, but also vowed to take legal action against its sources — the US diplomats who mention it in cables they sent home. | |
| Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said on Wednesday that Turkey was working on legal action against claims made by US diplomats against him in confidential documents released by whistleblower Internet site WikiLeaks — including claims that he owns eight secret Swiss bank accounts. | |
| Speaking at an inauguration ceremony for the Ankara City Security Management System project yesterday, Erdoğan responded to questions from the press on the recently leaked correspondence between the US and its diplomats around the world.
Erdoğan criticized the opposition that demanded that he explain the allegations about his Swiss bank accounts saying, “You can’t speak about increasing respect for Turkey in the world and at the same time demand that the prime minister of the Republic of Turkey ‘prove’ [that the allegations are baseless]. For one thing, our friends are working for [legal action] at national and international level. We will continue this process. They [US diplomats] should think about the rest. He said that although the US administration had apologized for Turkey being mentioned in the documents – in fact, according to statistics on the WikiLeaks site, most of the leaked cables had been sent from the US Embassy in Turkey – the government did not find this was adequate. “They [the US administration] are obliged to take the necessary action regarding these diplomats. Look at the situation of the intelligence organization of such a country as the US, look at its diplomacy. This is the US’ problem, not ours. I am saying this very openly, we have no problems; they are the ones who should worry. Those who have slandered us with things that we haven’t done will be smashed, finished and destroyed under these confessions.” In addition to his promise that he will pursue legal action against the US diplomats that made allegations about him, Erdoğan denied that he had any Swiss bank accounts. “I don’t have a single cent in Switzerland. If you can prove that I do, I won’t stay at my position or remain a deputy. But will you continue to occupy your seats?” he asked, addressing his accusers. Officials from the Foreign Ministry yesterday told Today’s Zaman that foreign diplomats in Turkey had 100 percent judicial immunity, which implies that a foreign diplomat can not be tried in a Turkish court. The same officials said the only way to hold such diplomats responsible was to request legal action against them in the US. The reverse also applies to Turkish diplomats serving abroad, officials said. The prime minister said that newspapers that published the allegations in their headlines, as well as the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) that has been dwelling on the claims since the documents have been exposed, are acting lowly, and that they are slanderers. “How can I prove something that does not exist?” Erdoğan said. He recalled earlier allegations that he had a billion dollars in the bank during the time when he served as mayor of İstanbul. “The person who slandered me then is currently in jail as a suspect in the Ergenekon investigation,” the prime minister said. He also said that if anyone had respect for their own country, they wouldn’t be accusing its prime minister based on dubious accusations made by foreign diplomats. He also accused the opposition of being distant to Turkey’s realities saying, “In the old days, [the opposition] just read the entertainment news to understand Turkey. Now they are reading entertainment diplomacy.” The prime minister also denied something else that appeared in one of the cables, that he had arranged a rail system tender in Antalya to be contracted to Sadık Albayrak, the father of his son-in-law. “The father of my son-in-law spent his entire life writing. They turned the man into a contractor,” he said. Erdoğan continued to criticize the opposition saying, “They believe the gossip they produce when it comes from others. Politics demands civility and politeness. Those who base their politics on lies and slander can never fulfill their aims. Is this how weak and filled with anxiety you are? Is this how desperate you are? How much more opportunistic can you be?” he said, addressing the opposition. He also called on the anti-government news media to “act with dignity.” He said those using the cables to attack the government were at the same low level as the opposition. However, the prime minister said he was also unnerved by insults toward the opposition. In a cable written on Dec. 30, 2004, former US Ambassador Eric Edelman refers to the main opposition CHP as “no more than a bunch of elitist ankle-biters.” It is also in this same cable where Edelman wrote, “We have heard from two contacts that Erdogan has eight accounts in Swiss banks; his explanations that his wealth comes from the wedding presents guests gave his son and that a Turkish businessman is paying the educational expenses of all four Erdogan children in the U.S. purely altruistically are lame.” CHP leader’s response CHP leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu was quick to respond to the prime minister’s remarks. Following a visit to a factory in the Nilüfer Organized Industrial Zone (NOSAB) in Bursa, Kılıçdaroğlu responded to questions from the press. In response to a question on what his response would be to the prime minister’s challenge that he would resign if the CHP could prove the allegations were true, but also expected Kılıçdaroğlu to resign if he couldn’t, the CHP leader said, “This allegation comes from the US Embassy. Why is he asking us [to prove it true] but not the original accusers? The allegations regarding Mr. Prime Minister are gravely serious, and for this reason he has to make a satisfying statement to the public. He should be reacting against the US, if this allegation is untrue. But if he doesn’t have the power to do that, if he is thinking, ‘I can’t hold the US accountable, so if I will be angry I should be angry at the opposition party,’ then this is wrong. What we are saying is clear. This is a very serious allegation, it is not something insignificant. This has been raised against the prime minister of the Republic of Turkey. He should respond to this. He should say, ‘none of this is true.’” He also recalled that two ministers whose names are mentioned in the documents denied the quotes that were attributed to them in the US diplomats’ cables. “The prime minister also shouldn’t let this go. Today, you might have this accusation, tomorrow there will be something else.” Kılıçdaroğlu said the prime minister should act rationally and hold accountable the right people for the allegations against him. “WikiLeaks documents have a purpose”In related developments, Deputy Prime Minister Cemil Çiçek made comments on the WikiLeaks documents, saying they were released with the purpose of creating tension between nations and politicians. Responding to questions from the press following the Conference on Fighting Corruption which he attended yesterday, Çiçek said he believed the motivation behind the leak was to create tension. “I think we should evaluate [the cables] in a calm manner.” He said the government will be making further statements on the documents over time. President Abdullah Gül also made a comment on the documents yesterday saying, “I am of the opinion that such ‘diplomatic gossip’ should not waste our time in domestic politics.” He said he did not know “who would believe” the truth of the allegations such as those made about Erdoğan.
. |
|
Breaking report from Wikileaks: “The Sky Is Blue”
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
When Wiki-L first burst on the scene with full MSM cooperation this should have been a red flag much like the hijacking of the tea parties by Republicans. It showed a helicopter shooting at civilians on the internet. Unless you have your head in the sand you’ve been able to see videos like that and worse on the web for years, 100s of them. They’ve been on alt media sites since 2003. So why did this particular one get so much attention? Because it was Wiki-L. And it warrants suspicion. This wasn’t some grass roots thing it was a viral video that had all the media outlets spreading it around the day it came out. It had a clever name “wiki” like the bullshit encyclopedia which runs on the principle of mob rule editing.
Wiki-L (We Kill) is digging up raw documents many from brainwashed military sources which are just restating state propaganda but because it tosses a bone to the peace movement for street cred it is thus amplifying the state propaganda about the important things at the same time. Everyone knows the US has killed and tortured people in Iraq and Afghanistan there is no hiding it anymore so it doesn’t hurt to admit it. Because at the same time they get to float the “we are chasing al qaeda myth”
That’s what Wiki-L is. A psy ops or at least it’s how it is being used, else the MSM would never report on it. Same as they refuse to report on Israel’s occupation.
Posted by [Redacted] at 1:45 PM
.
America Is Living in Glenn Beck’s Fantasy Land While Wikileaks Exposes Our Dirty Laundry
http://www.alternet.org
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Media and Culture headlines via email.
Editor’s Note: Running parallel over the last few months have been the endeavors of two disparate individuals, Fox News host Glenn Beck and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, the former espousing a pleasant faux reality for Americans and the latter confronting them with unpleasant truths.
Not surprisingly, Beck appears to have had the better of the exchange with Americans rallying to the polls to elect a right-wing Republican majority in the House of Representatives and Assange coming under a withering assault for supposedly endangering U.S. security, as Lawrence Davidson argues in this essay:
For those who pay attention to the battle of ideas that constantly goes on in the United States, two people presently have taken center stage for diametrically opposite reasons: Glenn Beck and Julian Assange.
The first is a man whose expertise is in the creation of alternate realities by playing fast and loose with the facts. This sort of enterprise has a long and sordid history to it, and while this fellow is on the rabid right, the tradition has its historical representatives across the political spectrum.
There is never any lack of an audience for such promoters of alternate realities. Usually the size of the audience can be correlated to an economic downturn, a defeat in war, or a popular consensus about government incompetency.
The second man is a champion of the free flow of information. He believes that the only way citizens will avoid being swept into alternate realities, and victimized by the resulting ill-conceived government actions, is to have full knowledge of what policies are being pursued and their real consequences.
Whether most people actually want to know these details is debatable, but this fellow is adamant that they should be available to anyone who cares to look. Now we come to the question of how these two men are perceived by the U.S. government and the “free” people of the United States.
Glenn Beck is an undereducated radio and TV personality turned political pundit. He was born in 1964 and has only a high school education. By his own admission, Beck spent at least15 of his early adult years as an alcoholic and drug addict.
Beck became suicidal in the mid-1990s and fantasized about imitating the manner of death chosen by the singer Kurt Cobain. He was pulled back from the brink with the help of Alcoholics Anonymous.
Fifteen years is a long time to baste a young adult’s brain in mind-altering substances, and I will leave it to the reader to decide if that history qualifies such a brain for political preaching. Yet, it is as a political wise man that millions of Americans now regard Glenn Beck.
Sporting a style of aggressive jargon that makes him a sure candidate for Eric Hoffer’s “man of words with a grievance,” Beck throws out accusations and suppositions which, with uncanny regularity, turn out to be wrong. However, that does not matter, for his listeners seem never to doubt him and so there is little motivation for Beck to doubt himself.
Increasingly popular, his growing number of listeners accepts him as a defender of the U.S. Constitution and traditional American values. And who are the threats that require this stalwart defender? Progressives and liberals, socialists and secularists all those who would destroy that mythical ideal of America that exists as an alternate reality in the minds of Beck and his followers.
Beck characterizes all such enemies as members of “Crime Inc.”
There is a strong naive simplicity in what Beck preaches. He espouses balanced budgets because “debt creates unhealthy relationships.” Somehow Glenn Beck can hold mortgages and still remain on good terms with his wife and kids, but it seems to him sinful that the government sells more Treasury bills than he feels is necessary. The government should be reduced to a minimum.
As to the country’s needy, that can be taken care of by private charity. If there is indeed such a thing as man-made global warming, that can be dealt with by the voluntary “greening” of personal homes.
What we have here is the projection of small town ways to a country of approximately 350 million.
There have been times when Beck has confessed that he is not a political person but rather an “entertainer.” Yet his denunciation of ubiquitous conspiracies, particularly of a leftist kind, and his regularly articulated rhetorical question — “What’s the difference between a communist or socialist and a progressive….? One requires a gun and the other eats away slowly” — is clearly not just show biz.
And, what are we to make of the entertainment value of his repeated proclamation that Americans are in a battle to defend the “eternal principles of God” which makes “God the answer” to all our problems?
No, whether Beck was originally playing at “paleo-conservatism” or not, he is now so adapted to his role that what you see is what is there. The actor has been transformed into the character he plays.
It is doubtful whether Glenn Beck has ever put forth a well thought-out, fact-checked, position in his life. Yet such a failing has not prevented him from obtaining the backing of the powerful Fox Broadcasting Company.
Beck and Fox are a very good fit. Both are part of a radical right which has now made itself appear acceptably all-American by redefining anything to the left of their positions as neo-socialist. And, they have drawn to themselves the millions of folks who are naive and simple conservatives living in a faux reality that defines the welfare state as communism and President Obama as a Muslim agent seeking to impose Sharia law on places like Oklahoma.
For such folks Beck’s nonsense somehow confirms all their hopes and fears. In their millions they are moved, weekly, to agree with whatever it is that they think he is saying.
The U.S. government has made no objection to the Fox-Beck propaganda show. Both are, of course, protected by the First Amendment. And, it is probably the case that at least some of the elements of elected government, for instance the Republican Party’s right-wing majority and the Blue Dog Democrats, are in agreement with all or part of Beck’s message.
The rest of the government, the liberal Democrats, for instance, seem frustrated and confused. They do not know how to respond to someone like Beck and so they hope that he will, in the end, prove a temporary phenomenon.
Who is Julian Assange?
Julian Assange, our second personality, is an Australian-born Internet expert. Born in 1971, he attended the University of Melbourne where he studied physics, mathematics and philosophy. However, he did not stay to complete a degree.
He made an early career as a computer programmer and is the author of both free and commercial pieces of software. A strong anarchistic strain runs through Assange’s early adult period. He was a member of a number of relatively benign hacker organizations and the ideal of information transparency seems to have been a strong driving force in his life from early on.
All of which eventually led him to found WikiLeaks in 2006. It is Assange’s contention that government secrecy almost always harms people and denies them the ability to make rational decisions. The press has the responsibility to fight against censorship but has been seduced into cooperating with the system it ought to be policing.
“How is it,” Assange asks, “that a team of five people has managed to release to the public more suppressed information…than the rest of the world press combined? It’s disgraceful.”
There are those who see Assange as an “Internet freedom fighter,” and Daniel Ellsberg of Pentagon Papers fame has asserted that Assange “is serving [American] democracy and serving the rule of law precisely by challenging the secrecy regulations, which are not laws in most cases, in this country.”
But that is not how American and foreign intelligence agencies see Julian Assange. Secrecy is part of their reason for being and without it they are out of a job.
To them he is a real threat. They have accused him of harming national security and putting in danger the agents that feed them their secret information. They offer no proof of any of this and fail to mention that the information they receive from these agents is often used to kill other people.
Assange has described a line-by-line review procedure used to protect “innocent parties who are under reasonable threat” but government spokesmen disparaged this claim and just repeat their charges against him in robotic fashion. …
Julian Assange has won several awards for battling censorship and upholding the public’s right to know. He has appeared on a number of media venues both in the U.S. and elsewhere. The British magazine The New Statesman included him in its list of the 50 most influential figures in 2010 and, it is reported, that he is in the running for Time Magazine’s 2010 “person of the year.”
Nonetheless, Assange’s loyal following is minuscule and if he becomes better known to the public at large it is likely to be a function of the smear campaign now being waged by the intelligence agencies. Their expertise in such covert operations is beyond question.
Beck v. Assange
Glenn Beck and Julian Assange represent two options for the American state of mind. Beck is a charlatan who preaches an alternate reality that affirms the untested, ahistorical and prejudicial assumptions and feelings of millions of Americans.
These are voting citizens who know little of what lies beyond their neighborhoods, but know absolutely how they feel. Beck tells them that their feelings really do correspond to the state of the world and so they avidly, loyally, listen to him.
We all like to be told that we are right. That makes Glenn Beck a source of ego re-enforcement for a significant segment of the population.
Julian Assange is a real truth-teller who shatters assumptions, calls into question feelings, and would force us all to look at the historically objective information that best represents how things are. What Assange is doing makes no one comfortable and reinforces nobody’s ego. He stands up and speaks truth to power but, as Noam Chomsky once pointed out, power already knows the truth.
If power bothers about the truth at all, it is to keep it largely secret. To do so it seeks the real truth-teller’s destruction while leaving the charlatan free to play the Pied Piper with impunity.
This does not bode well for the future of America and perhaps the West at large. Too many Americans, and their leaders as well, haven’t got an accurate sense of the real world. In part, that is why the U.S. government regularly formulates domestic and foreign policies that answer the demands of interest groups while harming the rest of us.
Such policies fail in the long run. In doing so they open political space for both charlatans and truth-tellers. And here they are in the persons of Glenn Beck and Julian Assange. Now America can choose.
.
“Wiki-Murders” In Iran, Signal “False Flag” Terror
http://www.sott.net
An attack on American forces in the Persian Gulf is being planned. Wikileaks is an integral part of the operation. Step one was the current “diplomatic” Wikileak. Step two, the brazen “Mossad style”murders in Iran.
Wikileaks couldn’t be more involved if they built the bombs or fired the missiles themselves.
When America is attacked, either in the Persian Gulf or at home, Wikileaks will be a part of it. The operation is staged for the Persian Gulf where American warships are “sitting ducks” for a sneak attack like the USS Liberty “incident.”
As with the Liberty attack, Israel can use friends in high places in the United States to assure that if they are blamed, they can claim it was an honest mistake, even if an American super-carrier goes down with all hands.
The preferred weapon will be submarine launched missiles, probably with small nuclear warheads, that will appear to be launched from Iran. Israeli submarines are currently on station within range of American targets, subs known to be armed with cruise type missiles similar to those used by Iran. The attacks on US forces are dependent on the build-up of tensions tied to terror bombings that have killed one Iranian scientist and wounded another.
A “working group” within the American military is tasked with placing the blame on Iran with “in the can” intelligence much as was used on 9/11. The same forces responsible for planning the Building 7 demolition on 9/11 are being called upon.
Iran is being “set up” through terrorist attacks timed to make any military action in the region immediately look like Iran “out of control.” More attacks on scientists and their families are planned until international tensions are high enough for a “false flag” terror attack on the United States to seem plausible.
Key media assets have been warning that a major story can be expected.
It will be claimed Iran attacked the United States in retaliation for terrorist acts Iran now blames on Israel and the United States. In truth, these acts are meant to be intentional provocations, but it is clearly understood that Iran is incapable of acting. Russia has never delivered the advanced air defense system Iran needs and with virtually no air force, Iran is incapable of resisting an American onslaught.
A Signature Mossad Operation
The attacks have killed one scientist and wounded another. The wives of both men were wounded. Israel has done everything but announce that it planned and executed these attacks and is planning more. Iran is being dared to respond but, in fact, no response by Iran will be necessary. Sources tell us that an act of war against the United States, one which can be blamed on Iran, is in the planning.
The attacks inside Iran are staged from Azerbaijan, Afghanistan and Baluchistan, a remote province of Pakistan. Each of these nations has surrendered control of border regions with Iran to intelligence agencies, including the CIA, Mossad and MI-6. All have separatist movements with ties to Israel and India.
The Baloch separatist group, Jundullah, funded by the CIA and operated by the Mossad, acts for Israel much as Hizbollah acts for Iran in Lebanon. Regular terror attacks inside Iran are staged, not only military targets but mosque bombings and assassinations. Jundullah, the PKK in Turkey and Kurdistan, the Tehrik-i-Taliban in Pakistan, all are operated by Israel as surrogates, attacking Turkey, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan and sometimes American forces as well.
Wikileaks Timing
There is now little doubt that Wikileaks is an intelligence operation managed from Tel Aviv, carrying out Israeli foreign policy. The most recent “leaks” have successfully reset the diplomatic stage in the Middle East, exposing undercurrents of animosity against Iran while destroying American diplomatic credibility.
Were a crisis in the region to arise, and one is already in motion thanks to the Israeli terrorists openly operating inside Iran, the United States would now be hamstrung in attempts to foster a regional settlement. Nobody is talking, not anymore, not when anything said will be in the newspapers and nobody is trusting the United States. President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton have been exposed as highly suspicious of Gulf region allies.
As clear as it was, from the outset, that Wikileaks is an intelligence operation of Israel, making use of their extensive network within the Departments of Defense and State, staffed by hundreds of “dual citizens,” it is really the powerful Israeli lobby, AIPAC, that makes it all possible.
Aipac spying Accusations
Former AIPAC lobbyist, Steve Rosen, an employee we have been informed was fired, not for spying against the United States but being “caught,” is suing the organization for defamation. He claims to have extensive files outlining spy operations by AIPAC that penetrate every aspect of America’s national security, information he claims the FBI has had all along, has had but has ignored.
Rosen claims, in a sense, that AIPAC is a spy organization.
AIPAC, the single most powerful organization in American politics, no member of congress, no president has ever held office without their blessing, has long been reputed to be a foreign lobby. However, loopholes created specifically for AIPAC allow it to circumvent all regulations that help protect America from foreign influences.
Now it is believed that the information Rosen is referring to is actually Wikileaks itself and that AIPAC is, in fact, Wikileaks.
One question that is never asked in the United States is how many American believe 9/11 was not what it seemed. After ABC’s Jon Faine attacked Kevin Bracken, a popular Australian labor leader, a poll with over 10,000 respondents showed 77% support for a 9/11 conspiracy. Though Bracken never accused Israel, Jon Faine was clear. Faine believed that, if 9/11 was a “false flag” that Israel would be blamed.
Though it isn’t clear how many Americans support one of the several 9/11 conspiracies, with or without Israel’s involvement, one thing is clear. When a suspected terrorist is arrested and a terrorist plot is uncovered, Americans seem unconcerned and millions are clearly skeptical. The current car bomb threat in Portland, Oregon is one such incident. There is no news followup, no internet chatter, nothing on “talk radio.” Most Americans assume the FBI invented the whole thing. Though this is probably not true, it is far easier to convince the average American the FBI has “gone bad” than of terrorist plotters.
A decade of phony alerts, airport hassles and outright lies have worn Americans out on terrorism. If asked, Americans would say, “bring it on.” However, it is because they fear real terrorists much less than their own political leaders, both former and current.
“Plans For “Wiki-War”
The geopolitical goals of a “Wiki-War” are potentially unlimited. The China-Iran-Pakistan axis, one that really doesn’t yet exist, could be preempted. Turkey can be isolated from its Islamic neighbors and intimidated. More likely, Israeli expansion is looking toward Western Iraq, where Israel has maintained a foothold in Mosul, near the Syrian border, for decades. Israel believes Western Iraq is as much a part of Israel as Jerusalem itself, tracing their stake on the region back 3500 years.
Israel has managed to play Chaldean Christian groups against their Shiite neighbors, who have longstanding enmity toward their Sunni countrymen, a region ripe for plucking. With Iran crushed by the United States, a nation whose economic viability would face immediate collapse with the closing of Persian Gulf oil supplies, a power vacuum would immediately open. Wikileaks has had significant success in neutering America’s diplomatic capabilities, leaving Israel as the regions only military force.
The “Wiki-War” is dependent on Iran having no air force and poor air defenses. With these crippling problems and a “defense only” capability aimed at shutting off the world’s oil supply, an air campaign against Iran will be devastatingly successful. Iran is virtually defenseless against it.
When the oil stops and the banks and stock markets crash, the exodus of “dual citizens” will begin.
Flashback:
WikiLeaks Under Scrutiny For Being US-Israel Psyops Organization
.

As early as January of 2005, high-ranking officials were 







































