Please see our Fair Use Notice

Bookmark and Share

December 7, 2010

Wikileaks or WikIsrael? WikiAngel or WikiWeasel? We Won't Let Them Pull The Wool Over Our Eyes!

Hello everysoul!

I just have so much material to share with you that I've decided to split it into 3 compilations. This first one deals almost (aside from a special focus below on the tense situation in the Korean peninsula) solely with the Wikileaks phenomenon that has reached critical mass in the last week with a barrage of media coverage, which is now ebbing away as everything does in the short attention span of nowadays shallow media coverage of current events, always chasing the next Big Thing as soon as the last one stops being new. In fact this whole WikiThing is sooo "last week" already... Yet there is much to be concerned and informed about.

You will find below a smorgasborg of viewpoints on it, most of them being extremely skeptical of the whole charade, many in fact viewing it as another kind of 9/11, a view I support as you'll see in my first long comment on top of the first article below. If we recall correctly not only the original 9/11 false flag operation was used to launch 2 phony and very bloody wars, but it was also the excuse to ram down everyone's throat the infamous Patriot Act which has set the stage for today's full spectrum destruction of a growing number of freedoms and rights that, in the US, are supposed to be enshrined in the constitution... Think for instance about the lunatic gropefest going on in US airports and before boarding US-bound flights from anywhere around the world and you'll have an idea of what it is coming to... And BTW I have over 30 pages of Rape Gate Update material that I'll also email you separately in the next couple days as this is far from over... And I'll also email you a "regular" fact-filled compilation... all three adding up to over 103,000 words...

So where is the parallel with 9/11? As the US and other Western governments come to realize that they cannot wack-a-mole Wikileaks out of existence - check its galaxy of mirror sites - I would not be surprised that, as some are beginning to realize, they will use this situation as an excuse to take over the Internet and clamp down China-style on the freedom of speech that is exponentially hacking at the branches of their legitimacy, exposing their lies and lobbies-driven corruption, and empowering countless good people to not only question the official lines spewed by the propaganda shamstream media, but organize through all kinds of ways to change the world from the bottom up.

We may have to go around the "roadblocks" and access-denial clogged Web arteries that may result from such possible attempts to stifle free speech, but I trust that with enough ingenuity and persistence, the voice of the conscience of millions of awakening souls will continue to come through loud and clear – and peacefully – to campaign and cocreate the changes we can believe in... the ones we came here to manifest.

Feel free to ERNleak this widely ;-)

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator

P.S. If you don't have much time right away to review this material below I've compiled for you, you could at least watch the following videos... and then you'll probably begin to be wikipissed of with these pissyleaks?

Is WikiLeaks A CIA Operation? Part 1 - Part 2 HERE - Part 3 HERE
Webster Tarpley exposes Julian Assange and Wikipedia as a CIA operation.

WikiLeaks is ZioPoison!


Britain Arrests WikiLeaks Founder on Sex Charges (December 7, 2010)
LONDON — In the latest twist in the drama swirling around the WikiLeaks anti-secrecy group, British police officials said on Tuesday they had arrested Julian Assange, its beleaguered founder, on a warrant issued in Sweden in connection with alleged sex offenses.Mr. Assange, a 39-year-old Australian, was arrested by officers from Scotland Yard’s extradition unit when he went to a central London police station by prior agreement with the authorities, the police said. A court hearing was expected later.In a statement, the police said: “Officers from the Metropolitan Police extradition unit have this morning arrested Julian Assange on behalf of the Swedish authorities on suspicion of rape.”Mr. Assange denies the charges of sexual misconduct said to have been committed while he was in Sweden in August. It was not immediately clear if Mr. Assange would resist extradition to Sweden for questioning by prosecutors there. CLIP - AS IS MENTIONED FURTHER BELOW... Assange Accuser Worked with US-Funded, CIA-Tied Anti-Castro Group "at least one of which is US-funded and openly supported by a former CIA agent convicted in the mass murder of seventy three Cubans on an airliner he was involved in blowing up." AS ilyes ( JUST POINTED OUT TO ME ADDING "the one who's allegedly CIA-PsyOps involved is one of the women who've levied the charge of 'rape' against him ... in Sweden, 'rape' includes sexual relations without a condom... What if he genuinely IS innocent of all the crazy Zionist/CIA propaganda charges?" AS THE TITLE OF THIS COMPILATION IMPLIES - WikiAngel or WikiWeasel? - THE JURY IS STILL OUT... YOU DECIDE...

To ensure that these compilations are not blocked, please add to your safe senders list. If you don't know how to do so, go at where you will find a very comprehensive set of instructions. Your feedback is as always welcomed and may be included in a coming compilation - unless you prefer it is not. Circulating this compilation (or any part of it) and personally inviting your correspondents to subscribe to this list would also help enlarge the circle of people who have access to this material. Please include the following note and the URL address for the archived copy below along with your forwards, so others may have the opportunity to explore the original copy, if they so choose.

Free subscription to a large weekly Earth Rainbow Network compilation by simply sending a blank email to

This compilation is archived at

To share this material with others, click HERE and then click on the icon(s) of the place(s) (like Facebook Blogger, etc.) where you want to share it, log on, etc. and it will be automatically posted there. You can also access the archived copy of this compilation (link shown above) and click on the “share” button featured under the Google automatic translation button, near the top, and then follow the same steps just mentioned.

STATS for this compilation: Over 34,000 words and 138 links provided.

To unsubscribe from the Earth Rainbow Network automated listserver, or change your listing on it when you have a new email address, you can do it yourself through sending a blank email at from the email account you wish to unsubscribe and then you subscribe your new email address - from your new email account - through sending a blank email to Or you can also ask me at to do it for you.


"Although the election of Barack Obama gave rise to the "outrage" expressed by the so-called "tea party" movement, if there is any political group in America that has a right to be outraged, it is the Progressives. They bought into Obama's message of change and hope, believed that the criminals of the Bush dictatorship would have to answer for their crimes, and naively dreamed that America's respect for peace, justice and human rights would be restored. But, as Wikileaks and the antics of Obama's "Justice" Department have shown, the Progressives were deceived. Yet, as in the past, they are forced to be supportive of Obama's duplicity because the alternative is worse. I want to believe that the Wikileaks documents will change America for the better. But what undoubtedly will happen is a repetition of the past: those who expose government crimes and cover-ups will be prosecuted or branded as criminals; new laws will be passed to silence dissent; new Liebermans will arise to intimidate the corporate-controlled media; and new ways will be found to conceal the truth. What Wikileaks has done is make people understand why so many Americans are politically apathetic and content to lose themselves in one or more of the addictions American culture offers, be it drugs, alcohol, the Internet, video games, celebrity gossip, text-messaging-in essence anything that serves to divert attention from the harshness of reality."

- David R. Hoffman - Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru -- Taken from Valerie Plame, YES! Wikileaks, NO! below A MUST READ. Powerful, eye-opening article!

"It is a well-known practice of intelligence agencies to give large bits of genuine material, none of it too compromising, in order to get either an important piece of intelligence in return or to “bury” some damaging deception like a fish hook planted in a minnow."

- Taken from A rebuke to "Is Wikileaks a front for the CIA or Mossad?" below


1. The US Diplomatic Leaks - A Superpower's View of the World
2. Wiki-Leaks Serves Israeli Agenda Of Demonizing Iran
3. The Complete Idiot's Guide to WikiLeaks's Latest Document Dump
4. Is the Internet 9/11 Under Way?
5. Is Wikileaks being manipulated by an intelligence service?
6. U.S. intelligence retaliates against Israel's role in Wikileaks's disclosures
7. A rebuke to "Is Wikileaks a front for the CIA or Mossad?"
8. Wildfires and Wikileaks
9. WikiLeaks founder threatens to release entire cache of unfiltered files
10. Who, Precisely, Is Attacking the World?
11. Valerie Plame, YES! Wikileaks, NO!
12. Live with the WikiLeakable world or shut down the net. It's your choice
13. Net neutrality, the FCC, Wikileaks and the future of internet freedom

Check also...

GORDON DUFF: THE WIKI HOAX (December 2, 2010)
True colors, we are seeing them now. Those still trying to peddle the Wikileaks myth, the boyish grin concealing the powerful conspiracy, espionage and treason at the highest levels of American society, these are the real enemies of the information age. There are two opinions of Wikileaks. The worlds intelligence services all, every single one, believes Wikileaks is simply an intelligence agency playing games. They say this to each other, Vladimir Putin and Zbigniew Brzezinski have announced it to the world and others are following suit. Nobody, at least nobody typically “answerable” will say the word “Israel” but it is what they mean when they say “intelligence agency.” They mean Israel. Every Wikileak does something to help Israel in a different way at a different time. If Israel has a problem, a Wikileak is there, part of the solution. This time, Secretary Clinton was in the way and Wikileaks showed up to gut the State Department and give Israel the usual “buff and polish” job they usually do.There is another group, not a group that actually believes Wikileaks is real, few but the “Joe Six-Pack” crowd buys that, but a group that loves Wikileaks like an addict loves a fix. The press loves Wikileaks. I even love Wikileaks. Wikileaks is pushing readership through the roof, not just America but worldwide. Wikileaks is a news marketing phenomenon like any disaster. There is a reason the media are compared to vultures and hyenas.Killing Wikileaks as the hoax it is, and not a harmless hoax, not by a long shot, is like killing the golden goose. Wikileaks sells news, pulls up website traffic to unimaginable levels, even crashes servers from overload. There isn’t just one story, teaching the world how bad America is, there is also the daytime TV drama, the soap opera of Julian Assange.I wonder when the public will pick up on the endless stream of carefully posed, carefully staged photos. Just imagine meeting Assange, hiding from Interpol, running for his life, the CIA hunting him down, angry “date rape’ victims lurking the streets of London and Amsterdam. He always has time for the media, never misses an interview.
(...) Calling Wikileaks a simple hoax is a kindness. Maybe we can call 9/11 a hoax also. Will the families of the dead feel any better? History will prove Wikileaks, 9/11, the invasion of Iraq, the mindless and seemingly eternal fiasco of Afghanistan are all acts in the same play, certainly a tragedy but hardly Shakespearean. Bradley Manning isn’t the “Wikileaker,” not by a long shot. If the FBI’s assertions about AIPAC are correct and there is no reason to believe otherwise, Wikileaks could easily be the small army of “dual citizens,” the only possible suspects. There is no other group able to silence and shelve the FBI, able to pull documents out of databases at Defense, State, foreign embassies. The sad attempts to blame Manning or the Chinese, certainly victims of the recent revelations, are acts of desperation.Wikileaks the hoax isn’t an area for rumination. You accept the fact or show your colors, red white and blue or blue and white.That time is here, the debates are long over. Assange a hero? Assange a victim? Where you see those questions, look behind them. You will see the smiling face of treason, not for the first time.

Assange Accuser Worked with US-Funded, CIA-Tied Anti-Castro Group (December 4, 2010)
Yesterday Alexander Cockburn reminded us of the news Israel Shamir and Paul Bennett broke at Counterpunch in September. Julian Assange’s chief accuser in Sweden has a significant history of work with anti-Castro groups, at least one of which is US funded and openly supported by a former CIA agent convicted in the mass murder of seventy three Cubans on an airliner he was involved in blowing up. CLIP

Wikileaks: Brought to you by the CIA - These guys nailed it back in July
Everything you wanted to know about Wikileaks but didn't know to ask Julian Assange. He's a guy with a vague history... Who travels the world without visible means of support... His parents: Members of an LSD "cult" that abused kids... Hmmm... He's not against war... He hates the 9/11 truth movement... He has no info about the Bush or Obama White House...or the Federal Reserve Bank... or Goldman Sachs (but he is helping take down Bank of America)... His "leaks" paint Pakistan as a threat and foreign politicians the CIA doesn't like as jerks... He believes Osama is alive... and probably in Pakistan... Everything else he "leaks" is stuff we all already knew... The mainstream media loves him... The right wingers love to hate him and are using him as a justification to censor the Net... If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and smells like a duck... Another intelligence agency spectacle. (Comment from BrasscheckTV) If you like how these 2 guys treat deliver their angle on the propaganda of the lamestream check their other releases through feed://">feed://


NOTE from Jean: With each passing day, the rising tensions between North and South Korea - which the US appears to be keen on fostering, perhaps as a smokescreen for its own crumbling economic situation but also as part of the Cabal gradual build up of a casus belli to engage at some point into a wider war with China whose growing economic and military clout, paired with a possible secret alliance with its own group of ETs (according to David Wilcock), may be jeopardizing the Cabal's agenda. I know this sounds far-fetched but, nevertheless, I feel there is a growing cause for concern there and that should some inconsiderate and yet deliberate action ignite the power keg that this whole heavily militarized peninsula is, it will be extremely difficult to climb back from an ensuing full, bloody confrontation that could have far-reaching consequences that none of the actors involved seems to be willing to seriously consider and factor into their current aggressive posturing. So if you feel like sending peaceful and healing vibes to the millions of souls who have been trapped into this long tragedy of a people separated by 2 opposing paradigms instilled into them by their respective controllers from day one of their lives, by all means shower liberally all souls concerned with the Love-filled Light of forgiveness, compassion and reconciliation, for the highest good of all... as One.

China urges dialogue on North Korea crisis (December 7, 2010)
China says dialogue and co-operation are the only way forward to help deal with tensions on the Korean peninsula.The responsibility for maintaining peace should be "shouldered by all parties in the region," foreign ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said.China - North Korea's main ally - is under pressure from the US and others to rein in the "provocative" North.It comes two weeks after North Korea's deadly attack on a South Korean island in answer to military drills by Seoul.Two South Korean marines and two civilians were killed when Pyongyang shelled Yeonpyeong island on 23 November.It was the first attack on a civilian-populated area in the South since the end of the Korean war in 1953.The situation on the peninsula remains highly unstable. South Korea has entered a second day of major live-fire exercises, despite warnings from the North.

KNOW THE FACTS: North Korea lost close to 30% of its population as a result of US bombings in the 1950s by Michel Chossudovsky (27 November 2010)
The World is at a dangerous crossroads. The US is seeking a pretext to wage war on North Korea. North Korea is said to constitute a threat to Global Security. From the Truman Doctrine to Obama. The history of the 1950s Korean war confirms that extensive war crimes were committed against the Korean people. As confirmed by the statement of General Curtis Lemay: "Over a period of three years or so we killed off - what - twenty percent of the population." North Korea lost close to thirty percent of its population as a result of US led bombings in the 1950s. US military sources confirm that 20 percent of North Korea's population was killed off over a three period of intensive bombings: "After destroying North Korea's 78 cities and thousands of her villages, and killing countless numbers of her civilians, [General] LeMay remarked, "Over a period of three years or so we killed off - what - twenty percent of the population." It is now believed that the population north of the imposed 38th Parallel lost nearly a third its population of 8 - 9 million people during the 37-month long "hot" war, 1950 - 1953, perhaps an unprecedented percentage of mortality suffered by one nation due to the belligerance of another." During The Second World War the United Kingdom lost 0.94% of its population, France lost 1.35%, China lost 1.89% and the US lost 0.32%. During the Korean war, North Korea lost close to 30 % of its population. These figures of civilian deaths in North Korea should also be compared to those compiled for Iraq by the Lancet Study (John Hopkins School of Public Health). The Lancet study estimated a total of 655,000 Iraqi civilian deaths, following the US led invasion (March 2003- June 2006). We call upon the people of the US, Canada and NATO countries to put pressure on their governments. A war on North Korea would engulf the entire region. - CHECK ALSO Escalation in the Korean Peninsula? US and South Korea plan more war games - Dangers of Military Escalation: Russian, Chinese foreign ministers discuss Korean conflict - US-South Korea military drills. China opposes any military acts in exclusive economic zone without permission - The Threat of War in Korea: Philippines prepares for possible mass evacuation from S.Korea, requests Japan's aid - New Korean war could ensnare Canada, documents suggest - US Exploits Korean Clash to Step Up Pressure on China - VIDEO: South Korea Admits to Firing Shells at North Korea - Skirmish between North and South Korea: South Korea Fired the First Shot -
Korea War Pretext Incident: The Sinking of the Cheonan, Reviewing the Evidence

Ron Paul: Korea Conflict May Be Orchestrated Crisis To Boost Dollar (November 23, 2010)
RAND Corporation has been aggressively lobbying the Pentagon to become embroiled in a major new war to jump-start a recovery of the US economy and boost profits for the military-industrial complex after the scaling down of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Chinese media sources reported that RAND had presented a proposal to the Pentagon that revolved around fostering a conflict with a major foreign power in order to stimulate the American economy and prevent a double dip recession. Although at the time RAND considered North Korea on its own to be too small a target, any full scale confrontation between the Koreas would embroil the United States on the side of the South and China on the side of the North. If North Korea were to tap its arsenal of nuclear weapons, the entire international community would quickly rubber stamp a US-led military assault on the rogue nation. Given the fact that North Korea's nuclear belligerency has its foundations in the best efforts of people like Donald Rumsfeld and the Bush administration, through the AQ Khan weapons trading network, to provide Communist agitator Kim Jong-Il and his hereditary successor with nuclear weapons, the fact that we are now seeing tensions reach boiling point represents a huge opportunity for the US military-industrial complex to manipulate into being the massive war that they have been seeking for years. - CHECK ALSO The Korean Crisis: Cui Bono?

S. Korea starts naval firing drills amid tension (Dec 6, 2010)
SEOUL (AP) - South Korean troops pushed ahead with naval firing drills Monday, a day after North Korea warned such exercises would aggravate already high tensions between the rivals following the North's deadly shelling last month of a front-line South Korean island.South Korea's army began firing artillery into the waters off the divided Korean peninsula as part of week-long drills set to continue through Sunday, South Korean army and Joint Chiefs of Staff officers said.The officers, who spoke on condition of anonymity citing office rules, said the drills were to take place at nearly 30 sites, but none of Monday's exercises were near the disputed western sea border between the Koreas where last month's attack took place. The navy said warships were to join the drills later this week. South Korea's military and Defense Ministry declined to provide further details on the drills.Tensions have soared since Nov. 23, when North Korea rained shells on Yeonpyeong Island, killing four South Koreans, including two civilians. The North said South Korea first fired artillery toward its territorial waters. South Korea says it fired shells southward, not toward North Korea, as part of routine exercises. Deadly skirmishes occur periodically along the disputed maritime border, but the latest assault on Yeonpyeong, home to both fishing communities and military bases, was the North's first to target a civilian area since the 1950-53 Korean War. The North also stoked regional tension last month by revealing a large uranium-enrichment facility that would give it a new method of making material for atomic bombs in addition to its known plutonium-based program. Top diplomats from the U.S., South Korea and Japan were to meet in Washington on Monday to discuss the North's nuclear program and its artillery barrage. On Sunday, North Korea lashed out at South Korea for causing "uncontrollable, extreme" tension on the peninsula, pointing to the planned firing drills and what it called South Korea's "frantic provocations." "The South Korean puppet group, far from drawing a lesson from the deserved punishment it faced for its reckless firing of shells into the territorial waters of the (North Korea) side around Yeonpyeong Island, is getting more frantic in military provocations and war moves," the North's official Korean Central News Agency said. A KCNA dispatch warned that a war between the Koreas would disturb regional peace and security. South Korean Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin said last week that jets would bomb the North if it stages another attack. Kim took office Saturday, replacing a predecessor who resigned amid criticism that South Korea's response to the shelling was too slow and weak.Kim inspected an army base near the heavily fortified land border Sunday and urged troops to strengthen their combat capability and mental toughness, according to his office. A day earlier, he visited Yeonpyeong Island and vowed to take strong measures to ensure North Korea would not dare to make more provocations. Despite the recent attack, the Defense Ministry believes it's unlikely North Korea would launch a full-scale war because it could not wage a conflict for long and because of South Korea's solid military alliance with the United States, Yonhap news agency reported Sunday citing the military. The Yeonpyeong attack came eight months after the sinking of a South Korean warship blamed on a North Korean torpedo attack - also near the maritime border. Forty-six sailors were killed. North Korea has vehemently denied involvement. The Korean War ended with an armistice, not a peace treaty, technically leaving the two countries still at war. The U.S. stations 28,500 troops in South Korea to deter potential aggression from North Korea.

North Korea: U.S.-South drills may trigger war (Dec 6, 2010)
SEOUL - South Korea on Tuesday rejected China's offer to host talks over a North Korean attack on its soil as lawmakers here demanded the military better prepare the country for the risk of war.Meanwhile, North Korea warned that military drills between the United States and South Korea could trigger a "full-blown war."Fighter jets from the USS George Washington streaked across overcast skies during the drills taking place off the west coast of South Korea. Navy Cmdr. Pete Walczak said no unusual movements had been detected from North Korea. "Absolutely nothing," Walczak said. "A lot of saber-rattling, fist-shaking, but once our presence is here, reality says that it's really nothing."Hong Lei, spokesman for China's foreign ministry, reiterated his country's offer to host emergency talks for envoys from the nations that comprise the suspended six-party discussions on North Korea's nuclear weapons program. The U.S. and its allies said China must do more than ask its ally North Korea to attend a discussion."The Chinese have a duty and obligation" to pressure "the North Koreans that their belligerent behavior has to come to an end," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.
(...) "If North Korea showers Seoul with artillery rounds and rockets, there are predictions that half of the capital will be destroyed in just a day," Yoo said according to The Chosun Ilbo, a Seoul newspaper. "The only solution is to deliver precise strikes on North Korean positions first through a massive air attack in the early stages of a war."North Korea also rejected China's offer of talks and slammed the presence of the U.S. Navy at the drills taking place south of Yeonpyeong, which was shelled Nov. 23, leaving four people dead."Our republic has a war deterrent that can annihilate any aggressor at once," said the government-run newspaper Minju Joson. At a rally in Seoul, Kim Ji Young gripped flowers and a "No War" placard and with her other hand took a microphone at a gathering outside the South Korean Defense Ministry headquarters."I am angry at the war games. They could start a war," says Kim, 21, a philosophy student at Ewha Women's University in Seoul. "Our president is too strong toward North Korea."At another rally, veterans tore and burned North Korean flags and photos of North Korean leader Kim Jong Il and his son and heir apparent Kim Jong Un."We've had enough," said Kim Jin Gyu, 64, adding that North Korea deserves punishment. "We should just smash it up." CLIP - CHECK ALSO Carter on North Korea: 'We may well have peace'

Spiralling out of Control: The Risk of a New Korean War (December 4, 2010)
(,,,) President Lee has promised to take a much harder line on North Korea, and already the South has sent 400,000 propaganda leaflets across the border on balloons. (13) There has also been talk of resuming loudspeaker broadcasts across the border. The sending of leaflets was in violation of a 2004 agreement between the two sides to halt propaganda campaigns aimed at each other. By the end of December, South Korea plans to hold another round of artillery drills on islands lying in disputed waters, including, dismayingly enough, Yeonpyeong Island. Nothing could be calculated to be more provoking under the circumstances. In preparation for the response to the drills that are expected from North Korea, island defenses are being beefed up. South Korea has added multiple rocket launchers, howitzers, missile systems and advanced precision-guided artillery to the Yeonpyeong arsenal. According to a South Korean official, "We decided to stage the same kind of fire drill as the one we carried out on the island on November 23 to display our determination." The new drills appear calculated to provoke a conflict, and this time South Korea is intent on an asymmetrical response. The military is revising its rules of engagement so as to jettison concerns about starting a wider conflict. If former Defense Minister Kim Tae-young is to believed, if there is another North Korean strike, then warships and fighter jets of both South Korea and the U.S. will launch attacks on the North. Incoming Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin is if anything even more determined to fan the flames of conflict into a wider conflagration. The South Korean military will immediately launch "psychological warfare," including, presumably, loudspeaker broadcasts across the border. The North has promised to target loudspeakers if they are put in operation, and that would in turn provide the pretext for the South Korean military to launch combat operations. If there is another exchange of fire with the North, Kim announced, "We will definitely air raid North Korea." All combat forces available would be mobilized, he promised. The newly minted rules of engagement are also going to permit "preemptive" strikes on North Korea based on the presumption of a possible attack. In other words, if North Korea fails to provide a pretext for military action, the Lee Administration can attack the North without provocation, if it chooses to do so.  Lee Myung-bak has already achieved his dream of demolishing the Sunshine Policy. Relations between the two Koreas are at their lowest point since the end of military dictatorship in South Korea. Now he aims to deliberately trigger armed conflict in order to demonstrate "toughness," and not incidentally, drive the final nail into the coffin of the Sunshine Policy. Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin feels that the risk of war is low. "It will be difficult for North Korea to conduct a full-scale war because there are some elements of insecurity in the country, such as the national economy and power transfer." Those may be arguments against North Korea's ability to successfully sustain a long-term war over the course of a year or two, but it seriously misreads the ability and will of the North Korean military to put up a determined fight. The extent of possible South Korean air strikes on the North is not clear, but anything other than an extremely limited and localized action is likely to trigger total war. And that is a war that the U.S. will inevitably be drawn into. Even presuming a quick defeat of the North (which would be unlikely), eighty percent of North Korea is mountainous, providing ideal terrain for North Korean forces to conduct guerrilla warfare. The U.S. could find itself involved in another failing military occupation. With both sides heavily armed, the consequences could be much worse for Koreans, and casualties could reach alarming totals. Four million Koreans died in the Korean War. Even one percent of that total in a new war would be unconscionable, and Lee Myung-bak is deluded if he believes he can ride the tiger of armed conflict and remain in control of the path it takes.


Note from Jean: (I wrote this over a week ago when I first tried to make sense of it all). Around the world there is a bit of a media frenzy over the release of these classified US documents and it is certainly interesting to see what comes to the light now - after having been carefully filtered by Wikileaks in conjunction with 5 global newspapers and some vetting of critically sensible information by the US itself. As you'll discover if you delve into this mass of information, much of it is of a relatively trivial nature with little long term impact. In a couple weeks from now everyone will have moved on to the next BIG NEWS of the day and it will all soon be forgotten - just as what happened to the information recently revealed through Wikileaks on the Afghan and Iraq war logs now nearly invisible in the world's rear-view mirror. What is REALLY important in this NOT so coincidental release of material is once again hidden in plain view, but diluted for the moment in the mass of trivia that fascinates so many. You'll see that there is already ONE BIG THING that will keep coming up in the media, which may very well explain why this was done, and it is the revelation - which being done in this manner makes it indisputable in everyone's gullible mind - that North Korea has sold to Iran advanced Russian-designed missile technology that may soon allow this uncontrollable (by the Cabal) country to threaten European capitals with potentially nuclear-tipped intermediate range missiles, and possibly even Washington in the near future once the Iranian have figured out how to build intercontinental ballistic missiles, all of which constitutes a 'wonderful', convenient justification for launching a US/Israel-lead preemptive nuclear attack against Iran, the perfect trigger - in the Cabal's view - to blow the global power keg.

Another telling Wikileaks revelation is the fact that, privately, all Arab countries around Iran want the US to "cut the snake's head", another convenient psychological justification-for-war element. There is also the troubling matter of Pakistan's quickly expanding nuclear arsenal and the alleged fear that some hypothetical non-CIA controlled terrorist group could put its hands on Pakistani nuclear material in the event of a meltdown of the military control over its fissile material and weapons, which to me is only a diversionary psy-op tactic because I believe that, in fact, the CIA/Cabal has a firm control over Pakistan's military establishment and if ever some nuclear material is leaked to some patsy terrorist group, it will be with their clear but covert approval as part of a plan hatched to create a false flag dirty bomb event in some US city to justify retaliating against Iran - same model as the 9/11 pretext to attack Iraq.

Now, very little attention is paid in the propaganda media to the mysterious source [I don't believe Bradley Manning is this source. That's just another diversion. More on this below...] at the origin of all the material released to Wikileaks over the past year, to the motivations behind this massive leaking, and especially to the long term ramifications of this strategic move by the tight group of powerful men - the infamous dark cabal/shadow government - who are possibly the only ones with enough string-pulling power to achieve such a feat without being detected. Some have called this event a sort of new 9/11 and there is some truth to it as once again a highly secret cabal has mastered a feat of global mind manipulation towards the furtherance of its world domination agenda. I feel it is important to keep this perspective in mind over the coming weeks and months so as to better understand the moves made on the global chessboard by the worldly agents of the reptilian entities who, from their deep underground lairs, battle with the galactic federation to keep control of this planet, a battle we are here to help turn to the Light Forces's advantage as part of our own "deep penetration" covert mission of redemption... if you see what I mean. It is up to us now to not get fooled with this whole cooked up affair and to turn this, aikido-like, into an opportunity to further enlighten everyone about the Cabal's many shenanigans and the duplicitous nature of their covertly controlled governments and media... including Wikileaks!

This being said, I must add that it is very likely that most if not all people involved in Wikileaks definitely have their heart at the right place and are convinced they are doing this for the greater good of all. They certainly deserve our kudos and support for their courage and persistence, even if some of the information they are leaking has been planted there to further the Cabal's agenda as I surmise above. Also it is probable that there will be unintended consequences to all this exposure of government's dealings, some of which may not turn out to be exactly supportive of the Cabal's covert agenda.

Here is also what ERN subscriber Jeff Wefferson ( from Australia wrote about this issue: "In case you haven't noticed, the entire "classified" infrastructure of the United States government has recently been compromised by a lone individual wielding a memory stick, who has mysteriously accessed a vast amount of top-secret government information and provided it all to the global public via...yes, Wiki-Leaks! Or so the story goes that is appearing all over the mainstream media. There's a reason why this story sounds so much like that of the 19 box-cutter-wielding "hijackers" who flew four hijacked planes over half of America while the entire U.S. Air Force 'stood down', flew two of them into the World Trade Centres and one into the Pentagon, causing both towers to collapse into their own footprint. Both stories are equally bogus crocks of shite concocted by the same psy-ops think-tanks in the basement of CIA hq in Langley Virginia. 9/11 and its mainstream story were the "problems" created by the NWO and PNAC to provide a "new Pearl Harbor" which would justify an astronomically lucrative "war on terror", their "solution" to not having a credible global "enemy" since Communism ate it. Because of 9/11 and its official story, otherwise intelligent people have sat and watched while every right they had, every dollar they earn, every thought they think has been systematically taken from them in the name of the "war on terror." The internet has long been the one glimmer of hope that we had with respect to being able to exchange information by-passing the global media mono-culture, so that, for those of us who still care, we could formulate a picture of what is REALLY going on. This "Wiki-leaks" thing is nothing more than a "9/11" against the internet as we currently know it. Obama: "We must seize this opportunity to preserve freedom and democracy by cracking down on those who would abuse the privilege of the free internet to subvert the peaceful intentions of the United States of America. God bless us all. Amen. ps. Yes, we can!" BEWARE: as usual, things are NOT what they seem."



The US Diplomatic Leaks - A Superpower's View of the World

By SPIEGEL Staff - 11/28/2010

251,000 State Department documents, many of them secret embassy reports from around the world, show how the US seeks to safeguard its influence around the world. It is nothing short of a political meltdown for US foreign policy.

What does the United States really think of German Chancellor Angela Merkel? Is she a reliable ally? Did she really make an effort to patch up relations with Washington that had been so damaged by her predecessor? At most, it was a half-hearted one.

The tone of trans-Atlantic relations may have improved, former US Ambassador to Germany William Timken wrote in a cable to the State Department at the end of 2006, but the chancellor "has not taken bold steps yet to improve the substantive content of the relationship." That is not exactly high praise.

And the verdict on German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle? His thoughts "were short on substance," wrote the current US ambassador in Berlin, Philip Murphy, in a cable. The reason, Murphy suggested, was that "Westerwelle's command of complex foreign and security policy issues still requires deepening."

Such comments are hardly friendly. But in the eyes of the American diplomatic corps, every actor is quickly categorized as a friend or foe. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia? A friend: Abdullah can't stand his neighbors in Iran and, expressing his disdain for the mullah regime, said, "there is no doubt something unstable about them." And his ally, Sheikh bin Zayed of Abu Dhabi? Also a friend. He believes "a near term conventional war with Iran is clearly preferable to the long term consequences of a nuclear armed Iran."

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's emissaries also learn of a special "Iran observer" in the Azerbaijani capital of Baku who reports on a dispute that played out during a meeting of Iran's Supreme National Security Council. An enraged Revolutionary Guard Chief of Staff Mohammed Ali Jafari allegedly got into a heated argument with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and slapped him in the face because the generally conservative president had, surprisingly, advocated freedom of the press.

A Political Meltdown

Such surprises from the annals of US diplomacy will dominate the headlines in the coming days when the New York Times, London's Guardian, Paris' Le Monde, Madrid's El Pais and SPIEGEL begin shedding light on the treasure trove of secret documents from the State Department. Included are 243,270 diplomatic cables filed by US embassies to the State Department and 8,017 directives that the State Department sent to its diplomatic outposts around the world. In the coming days, the participating media will show in a series of investigative stories how America seeks to steer the world. The development is no less than a political meltdown for American foreign policy.

Never before in history has a superpower lost control of such vast amounts of such sensitive information -- data that can help paint a picture of the foundation upon which US foreign policy is built. Never before has the trust America's partners have in the country been as badly shaken. Now, their own personal views and policy recommendations have been made public -- as have America's true views of them.

For example, one can learn that German Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, the Germany's most beloved politician according to public opinion polls, openly criticizes fellow cabinet member Guido Westerwelle in conversations with US diplomats, and even snitches on him. Or that Secretary of State Clinton wants her ambassadors in Moscow and Rome to inform her whether there is anything to the rumors that Italian President Silvio Berlusconi and Vladimir Putin have private business ties in addition to their close friendship -- whispers that both have vehemently denied.

America's ambassadors can be merciless in their assessments of the countries in which they are stationed. That's their job. Kenya? A swamp of flourishing corruption extending across the country. Fifteen high-ranking Kenyan officials are already banned from traveling to the United States, and almost every single sentence in the embassy reports speaks with disdain of the government of President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga.

Weighing Public Interest against Confidentiality

Turkey hardly comes away any less scathed in the cables. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the cables allege, governs with the help of a cabal of incompetent advisors. Ankara Embassy officials depict a country on a path to an Islamist future -- a future that likely won't include European Union membership.

As with the close to 92,000 documents on the war in Afghanistan at the end of July and the almost 400,000 documents on the Iraq war recently released, the State Department cables have also been leaked to the WikiLeaks whistleblower platform -- and they presumably came from the same source. As before, WikiLeaks has provided the material to media partners to review and analyze.

With a team of more than 50 reporters and researchers, SPIEGEL has viewed, analyzed and vetted the mass of documents. In most cases, the magazine has sought to protect the identities of the Americans' informants, unless the person who served as the informant was senior enough to be politically relevant. In some cases, the US government expressed security concerns and SPIEGEL accepted a number of such objections. In other cases, however, SPIEGEL felt the public interest in reporting the news was greater than the threat to security. Throughout our research, SPIEGEL reporters and editors weighed the public interest against the justified interest of countries in security and confidentiality.

In a statement, a spokesperson for the White House condemned the impending publication of the documents by WikiLeaks as "reckless and dangerous." The cables, which contain "candid and often incomplete information," are not an expression of policy and do not always shape final policy decisions, the statement reads. "Such disclosures put at risk our diplomats, intelligence professionals, and people around the world," the spokesperson said. The fact that "private conversations" are now being made public "can deeply impact not only US foreign policy interests, but those of our allies and friends around the world."

It is now possible to view many political developments around the world through the lens of those who participated in those events. As such, our understanding of those events is deeply enriched. That alone is often enough to place transparency ahead of national regulations regarding confidentiality.

Following the leaks of military secrets from Afghanistan and Iraq, these leaks now put US diplomats on the hot seat. It is the third coup for WikiLeaks within six months, and it is one that is likely to leave Washington feeling more than a bit exposed. Around half of the cables that have been obtained aren't classified and slightly less, 40.5 percent, as classified as "confidential." Six percent of the reports, or 16,652 cables, are labelled as "secret" and of those, 4,330 are so explosive that they are labelled "NOFORN," meaning access should not be made available to non-US nationals. Taken together, the cables provide enough raw text to fill 66 years' worth of weekly SPIEGEL magazines.

Gossip and the Unvarnished Truth

Much in the material was noted and sent because those compiling the reports or their dialogue partners believed, with some certainty, that their transcripts would not be made public for the next 25 years. That may also explain why the ambassadors and emissaries from Washington were so willing to report gossip and hearsay back to State Department headquarters. One cable from the Moscow Embassy on Russian first lady Svetlana Medvedeva, for example, states that she is "generating tensions between the camps and remains the subject of avid gossip." It then goes on to report that President Medvedev's wife had already drawn up a list of officials who should be made to "suffer" in their careers because they had been disloyal to Medvedev. Another reports that the wife of Azerbaijan leader Ilham Aliyev has had so much plastic surgery that it is possible to confuse her for one of her daughters from a distance, but that she can barely still move her face.

What makes the documents particularly appealing, though, is that many politicians speak the unvarnished truth, confident as they are that their musings will never be made public.

What, though, do the thousands of documents prove? Do they really show a US which has the world on a leash? Are Washington's embassies still self-contained power centers in their host countries?

In sum, probably not. In the major crisis regions, an image emerges of a superpower that can no longer truly be certain of its allies -- like in Pakistan, where the Americans are consumed by fear that the unstable nuclear power could become precisely the place where terrorists obtain dangerous nuclear material.

There are similar fears in Yemen, where the US, against its better judgement, allows itself to be instrumentalized by an unscrupulous leader. With American military aid that was intended for the fight against al-Qaida, Ali Abdullah Saleh is now able to wage his battle against enemy tribes in the northern part of the country.

Insult to Injury

Even after the fall of Saddam Hussein, it still remained a challenge for the victorious power to assert its will on Iraq. In Baghdad, which has seen a series of powerful US ambassadors -- men the international press often like to refer to as American viceroys -- it is now up to Vice President Joe Biden to make repeated visits to allied Iraqi politicians in an effort to get them to finally establish a respectable democracy. But the embassy cables make it very clear that Obama's deputy has made little headway.

Instead, the Americans are forced to endure the endless tirades of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarek, who claims to have always known that the Iraq war was the "biggest mistake ever committed" and who advised the Americans to "forget about democracy in Iraq." Once the US forces depart, Mubarak said, the best way to ensure a peaceful transition is for there to be a military coup. They are statements that add insult to injury.

On the whole, the cables from the Middle East expose the superpower's weaknesses. Washington has always viewed it as vital to its survival to secure its share of energy reserves, but the world power is often quickly reduced to becoming a plaything of diverse interests. And it is drawn into the animosities between Arabs and Israelis, Shiites and Sunnis, between Islamists and secularists, between despots and kings. Often enough, the lesson of the documents that have now been obtained, is that the Arab leaders use their friends in Washington to expand their own positions of power.


Related articles, information and video:

Russians Refuted US Claim of Iranian Missile Threat to Europe (Nov 30, 2010)
Washington - A diplomatic cable from last February released by Wikileaks provides a detailed account of how Russian specialists on the Iranian ballistic missile programme refuted the U.S. suggestion that Iran has missiles that could target European capitals or intends to develop such a capability.In fact, the Russians challenged the very existence of the mystery missile the U.S. claims Iran acquired from North Korea. But readers of the two leading U.S. newspapers never learned those key facts about the document. The New York Times and Washington Post reported only that the United States believed Iran had acquired such missiles - supposedly called the BM-25 - from North Korea. Neither newspaper reported the detailed Russian refutation of the U.S. view on the issue or the lack of hard evidence for the BM-25 from the U.S. side. CLIP

Israel gets a pass in new 'Wikileaks' - Focus is on Iran (NOVEMBER 28, 2010)
Julian Assange said the release of classified US documents will cover "every major issue" in the world while Benjamin Netanyahu said material concerning Israel will not be the focal point of a new exposé by the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks. "Israel is not the center of international attention" declared a confident Netanyahu.You can't have it both ways fellows. Israel does stand at the center of every major issue in the middle east and in manipulating U.S. foreign policy. There will be nothing new revealed about the crimes of Israel but plenty about their 'enemies.' U.S. spying is featured but Israeli spying seems to be missing.From the JPost ... note that one of the first 'leaks' to come out and promoted by the Israeli press is about North Korea and linking them to Iran. Very convenient in light of the present North and South Korea 'crisis.' Barak encourages attack on Iran, N. Korea. The document, dated June 2, 2009 and sent from the American Embassy in Tel Aviv, details Barak's visit with a two Congressional delegations. It quotes Barak as saying that "'no option should be removed from the table' when confronting Iran and North Korea.""Barak asked rhetorically how a lack of firm response to North Korea would be interpreted by Iran's leadership, speculating the US government would be viewed as a 'paper tiger'," the diplomatic cable reads. CLIP

Secret US Embassy Cables
Wikileaks began on Sunday November 28th publishing 251,287 leaked United States embassy cables, the largest set of confidential documents ever to be released into the public domain. The documents will give people around the world an unprecedented insight into US Government foreign activities. The cables, which date from 1966 up until the end of February this year, contain confidential communications between 274 embassies in countries throughout the world and the State Department in Washington DC. 15,652 of the cables are classified Secret. The embassy cables will be released in stages over the next few months. The subject matter of these cables is of such importance, and the geographical spread so broad, that to do otherwise would not do this material justice. The cables show the extent of US spying on its allies and the UN; turning a blind eye to corruption and human rights abuse in "client states"; backroom deals with supposedly neutral countries; lobbying for US corporations; and the measures US diplomats take to advance those who have access to them. This document release reveals the contradictions between the US’s public persona and what it says behind closed doors – and shows that if citizens in a democracy want their governments to reflect their wishes, they should ask to see what’s going on behind the scenes. Every American schoolchild is taught that George Washington – the country’s first President – could not tell a lie. If the administrations of his successors lived up to the same principle, today’s document flood would be a mere embarrassment. Instead, the US Government has been warning governments -- even the most corrupt -- around the world about the coming leaks and is bracing itself for the exposures. The full set consists of 251,287 documents, comprising 261,276,536 words (seven times the size of "The Iraq War Logs", the world's previously largest classified information release). The cables cover from 28th December 1966 to 28th February 2010 and originate from 274 embassies, consulates and diplomatic missions. How to explore the data - Search for events that you remember that happened for example in your country. You can browse by date or search for an origin near you. Pick out interesting events and tell others about them. Use twitter, reddit, mail whatever suits your audience best.

WikiLeaks Documents Show Hillary Clinton Authorized US to Spy on Foreign Diplomats (29 November 2010)
As the WikiLeaks documents steadily reveal more and more controversial actions taken by the government in its international operations, one report from July 2009 shows Secretary of State Hillary Clinton authorizing US diplomats to spy and collect personal information on members of foreign agencies.(...) The cable also requested the "current technical specifications, physical layout, and planned upgrades to telecommunications infrastructure and information systems, networks, and technologies used by top officials and their support staffs," as well as "details on commercial and private VIP networks used for official communications, to include upgrades, security measures, passwords, personal encryption keys, and types of VPN versions used."In a statement on November 28, 2010, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said the documents were "not an expression of policy," but could nevertheless "compromise private discussions with foreign governments and opposition leaders." "President Obama supports responsible, accountable, and open government at home and around the world, but this reckless and dangerous action runs counter to that goal. By releasing stolen and classified documents, Wikileaks has put at risk not only the cause of human rights but also the lives and work of these individuals. We condemn in the strongest terms the unauthorized disclosure of classified documents and sensitive national security information."Clinton held a press briefing Monday to respond to the leak and said that the U.S. "deeply regrets" the release of classified information, promising to take bold action against the theft."I want to make clear that our official foreign policy is not set through these messages, but here in Washington," Clinton said. "I would also add that to the American people and to our friends and partners … we are taking aggressive steps to hold responsible those who stole this information."

A time lapse of 251,287 documents: The world map shows where the majority of the cables originated from, and where they had the highest level of classification.

A cache of diplomatic cables provides a chronicle of the United States' relations with the world.

Iran Fortifies Its Arsenal With the Aid of North Korea (November 28, 2010)
Secret American intelligence assessments have concluded that Iran has obtained a cache of advanced missiles, based on a Russian design, that are much more powerful than anything Washington has publicly conceded that Tehran has in its arsenal, diplomatic cables show. Iran obtained 19 of the missiles from North Korea, according to a cable dated Feb. 24 of this year. The cable is a detailed, highly classified account of a meeting between top Russian officials and an American delegation led by Vann H. Van Diepen, an official with the State Department's nonproliferation division who, as a national intelligence officer several years ago, played a crucial role in the 2007 assessment of Iran's nuclear capacity. The missiles could for the first time give Iran the capacity to strike at capitals in Western Europe or easily reach Moscow, and American officials warned that their advanced propulsion could speed Iran's development of intercontinental ballistic missiles. There has been scattered but persistent speculation on the topic since 2006, when fragmentary reports surfaced that North Korea might have sold Iran missiles based on a Russian design called the R-27, once used aboard Soviet submarines to carry nuclear warheads. In the unclassified world, many arms control experts concluded that isolated components made their way to Iran, but there has been little support for the idea that complete missiles, with their huge thrusters, had been secretly shipped. The Feb. 24 cable, which is among those obtained by WikiLeaks and made available to a number of news organizations, makes it clear that American intelligence agencies believe that the complete shipment indeed took place, and that Iran is taking pains to master the technology in an attempt to build a new generation of missiles. The missile intelligence also suggests far deeper military - and perhaps nuclear - cooperation between North Korea and Iran than was previously known. At the request of the Obama administration, The New York Times has agreed not to publish the text of the cable.The North Korean version of the advanced missile, known as the BM-25, could carry a nuclear warhead. Many experts say that Iran remains some distance from obtaining a nuclear warhead, especially one small enough to fit atop a missile, though they believe that it has worked hard to do so. Still, the BM-25 would be a significant step up for Iran. CLIP

Wiki-Leaks Serves Israeli Agenda Of Demonizing Iran (30 Nov 2010)

The US Embassy Cables

WikiLeaks cables expose Pakistan nuclear fears (30 November 2010)
US and UK diplomats warn of terrorists getting hold of fissile material and of Pakistan-India nuclear exchange -- American and British diplomats fear Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme could lead to fissile material falling into the hands of terrorists or a devastating nuclear exchange with India. The latest cache of US embassy cables released by WikiLeaks contains warnings that Pakistan is rapidly building its nuclear stockpile despite the country's growing instability and "pending economic catastrophe". Mariot Leslie, a senior British Foreign Office official, told US diplomats in September 2009: "The UK has deep concerns about the safety and security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons," according to one cable classified "secret/noforn [no foreign nationals]". Seven months earlier the US ambassador to Islamabad, Anne Patterson, cabled to Washington: "Our major concern is not having an Islamic militant steal an entire weapon but rather the chance someone working in government of Pakistan facilities could gradually smuggle enough material out to eventually make a weapon." The leak of classified US diplomatic correspondence exposes in detail the deep tensions between Washington and Islamabad over a broad range of issues, including counter-terrorism, Afghanistan and finance, as well as the nuclear question. The cables also revealed that: * Small teams of US special forces have been operating secretly inside Pakistan's tribal areas, with Pakistani government approval, while senior ministers have privately supported US drone attacks. * The ambassador starkly informed Washington that "no amount of money" from the US would stop the Pakistani army backing Islamist militants and the Afghan Taliban insurgency. * The US concluded Pakistani troops were responsible for a spate of extrajudicial killings in the Swat Valley and tribal belt but decided not to comment publicly to allow the army to take action on its own. * Diplomats in Islamabad were asked by the Pentagon to survey refugee camps on the Afghan border, possibly for air strike targeting information. * The president, Asif Ali Zardari - whose wife, Benazir Bhutto was assassinated - has made extensive preparations in case he too is killed, and once told the US vice-president, Joe Biden, that he feared the military "might take me out". Pakistan's rulers are so sensitive about their much-prized nuclear weapons that in July 2009 they stalled on a previously agreed plan for the US to recover and dispose of highly enriched uranium spent fuel from a nuclear research reactor, in the interests of preventing proliferation and theft. They told the US embassy: "If the local media got word of the fuel removal, "they certainly would portray it as the US taking Pakistan's nuclear weapons". US fears over Pakistan were spelled out in an intelligence briefing in 2008. "Despite pending economic catastrophe, Pakistan is producing nuclear weapons at a faster rate than any other country in the world," the secret cable said. CLIP

U.S. Chases Foreign Leaders' DNA, WikiLeaks Shows (November 29, 2010)
Foreign potentates and diplomats beware: the United States wants your DNA.If that chief of mission seemed a bit too friendly at the last embassy party, it might be because the State Department recently instructed U.S. diplomats to collect biometric identification on their foreign interlocutors. The search for the most personal information of all is contained in WikiLeaks' latest publication of tens of thousands of sensitive diplomatic cables.A missive from the Secretary of State's office in April 2009 asked diplomats in Africa to step up their assistance to U.S. intelligence. Not only should diplomats in Burundi, Rwanda and Congo collect basic biographical information on the people they talk to - a routine diplomatic function - but they should also gather "fingerprints, facial images, DNA, and iris scans." CLIP

Why Wikileaks is Good for Democracy (November 30, 2010) Yeah, yeah... And peeing is good for everyone!
Since 9-11, the US government, through Presidents Bush and Obama, has increasingly told the US public that "state secrets" will not be shared with citizens. Candidate Obama pledged to reduce the use of state secrets, but President Obama continued the Bush tradition. The Courts and Congress and international allies have gone meekly along with the escalating secrecy demands of the US Executive. By labeling tens of millions of documents secret, the US government has created a huge vacuum of information. But information is the lifeblood of democracy. Information about government contributes to a healthy democracy. Transparency and accountability are essential elements of good government. Likewise, "a lack of government transparency and accountability undermines democracy and gives rise to cynicism and mistrust," according to a 2008 Harris survey commissioned by the Association of Government Accountants. Into the secrecy vacuum stepped Private Bradley Manning, who, according to the Associated Press, was able to defeat "Pentagon security systems using little more than a Lady Gaga CD and a portable computer memory stick."Manning apparently sent the information to Wikileaks - a non profit media organization, which specializes in publishing leaked information. Wikileaks in turn shared the documents to other media around the world including the New York Times and published much of it on its website. CLIP - NOTE from Jean: Don't you think that this crappy explanation about how a 22 year old "hacker" managed to circumvent the most sophisticated cyber protection money can buy using only a "Lady Gaga CD and a portable computer memory stick" is just as implausible as the discovery, minutes after the planes crashed into the World Trade Center, of evidence linking a group of Saudi terrorist to this false flag attack?... This poor Bradley Manning is just a fall guy, a "patsy scapegoat sucker dupe victim stooge whipping boy" paraded in front of the propaganda media to "explain" those darn leaks... Oh! and BTW just like Osama Bin Laden, they will never "catch" Julian Assange... Well as long as he will be useful to them... But some are getting so 'excited' about this that someone in the inner circle of Stephen Harper is even calling for his death: Censors block WikiLeaks website; Interpol issues arrest order; Canada demands Assange be killed

Cyberattack Against WikiLeaks Was Weak (November 29, 2010) A MAKE-BELIEVE SMOKESCREEN ATTACK FOR PLAUSIBLE DENIAL PURPOSE? "Look! We tried to punish them so everyone knows we are angry at them. It cannot possibly be us who are behing these darn leaks!"
In the first test of WikiLeaks' resiliency since a staff rebellion earlier this year, the organization recovered within hours from a distributed denial-of-service attack during its rollout of leaked State Department cables Sunday. But experts who monitored the disruptive traffic say the attack was relatively modest in size.WikiLeaks' main web address and its "cablegate" site were unreachable as the organization's media partners published their first analyses from a massive trove of a quarter-million U.S. diplomatic cables Sunday afternoon. Hours earlier, WikiLeaks wrote on Twitter: "We are currently under a mass distributed denial-of-service attack." But Arbor Networks, which analyzes malicious network traffic crossing the internet's backbones, reports that the DDoS generated between 2 and 4 Gbps of disruptive traffic, slightly above the average for all DDoS attacks, but well below the peak 60 to 100 Gbps consumed by truly massive attacks against other websites over the last year. CLIP

WikiLeaks Reveals Iran's Secret, Worldwide Arms Hunt (November 28, 2010)
Guns and ammo from Turkey. Missile components from Germany. Guidance systems from China. Iran is on a global, clandestine mission to acquire weapons and weapons technologies of all sorts, diplomatic cables released Sunday by WikiLeaks reveal. And the Tehran regime is using a series of front companies in its attempt to assemble the arsenal. In a cable from February of 2010, State Department officials in Washington alert the staff at the U.S. embassy in Beijing that a Malaysia-based firm, Electronics Component Limited (ECL), is trying to buy three-axis fiber optic gyroscopes from a Chinese company. This isn't just a simple business deal, the dispatch makes clear. Gyroscopes measure orientation, which makes them a critical component of weapons' inertial navigation systems. These particular gyroscopes, the State Department warns, "would be suitable for use in the guidance systems of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and unmanned aerial vehicles."Worse, the cable adds, "ECL is part of a network of Iranian-controlled front companies that… procures sensitive goods on behalf of a number of Iranian entities of proliferation concern, including the Shahid Hemmat Industrial Group (SHIG), which is Iran's primary developer of liquid propellant ballistic missiles." The warning is part of a common thread emerging from WikiLeaks' three major document dumps. These diplomatic dispatches, along with war logs from Afghanistan and Iraq, detail a globe-spanning Cold War between Iran and the United States. Each side has its proxies, each side provides weapons to those allies, and each side uses the game of global diplomacy to corral the other's ambitions. "The metaphor most commonly deployed by Jordanian officials when discussing Iran is of an octopus whose tentacles reach out insidiously to manipulate, foment, and undermine the best laid plans of the West and regional moderates," one WikiLeaked cable reports. CLIP

Will Israel Attack Iran By Christmas? (28 NOV 2010)
To me, the most revealing parts of the Wikileaks diplo-docu-dump are about the Middle East. We already knew that the Sunni Arab autocrats cannot bear the thought of a Shiite nuclear bomb and are almost as worried as the Israelis. But now the evidentiary proof brings it home:The Saudi king was recorded as having "frequently exhorted the US to attack Iran to put an end to its nuclear weapons programme", one cable stated. "He told you [Americans] to cut off the head of the snake," the Saudi ambassador to Washington, Adel al-Jubeir said, according to a report on Abdullah's meeting with the US general David Petraeus in April 2008.The cables also highlight Israel's anxiety to preserve its regional nuclear monopoly, its readiness to go it alone against Iran – and its unstinting attempts to influence American policy. The defence minister, Ehud Barak, estimated in June 2009 that there was a window of "between six and 18 months from now in which stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons might still be viable". After that, Barak said, "any military solution would result in unacceptable collateral damage."Officials in Jordan and Bahrain have openly called for Iran's nuclear programme to be stopped by any means, including military. Leaders in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt referred to Iran as "evil", an "existential threat" and a power that "is going to take us to war".If we take Barak's word for it, the Israelis could launch World War III within a month. And would carry much of the Sunni Arab autocrats with it. One notes that Saudi foreign diplomats and functionaries are more wary about war with Iran than the royals. But there seems little discussion about the momentous consequences of a third war launched by the West against a Muslim country in less than a decade.

WikiLeaks Reveals Everybody's Christmas List: The World Wants Drones (November 29, 2010)
Black Friday has passed, but the holidays are upon us and shopping days are increasingly few. Having a hard time finding the perfect gift for that tiny emirate hoping to psych out Iran or the large NATO ally looking to fight terrorism in Iraq? Fortunately for you, WikiLeaks has revealed the number one item atop seemingly everybody's wish list: drones. Only a select few close American allies have the export-restricted Predator B (a.k.a. MQ-9 Reaper) armed drones, but that hasn't stopped countries from the United Arab Emirates to Turkey from pestering & pleading with America to sell them the shiniest new toy, the WikiLeaks document show. The United Arab Emirates, a tiny nation of 5 million already protected by a U.S. military presence in the country, has been looking to purchase only the latest and greatest military technology for a while now, outbuying Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Taiwan to become the American military's top buyer last fiscal year. The WikiLeaks documents show that in 2007, UAE officials pressed then Air Force chief of staff General Michael Moseley and then Central Command chief General John Abizaid during official visits to sell them the armed Predator B drone as part of their shopping spree. CLIP

Blocked! WikiLeaks Shows How Iran's Air Defense Deal Died (November 29, 2010)
For two years, U.S. diplomats and Israeli leaders steadily implored Russia not to sell Iran a powerful anti-aircraft missile that both feared could turn air strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities into a fiasco. Stopping the sale of the S-300 missile, an issue obscure to all but obsessive observers of the region, became a secret test for American diplomacy at the highest levels."For better or for worse," John Beyrle, the U.S. ambassador to Russia cabled back to Washington in February 2009, "the delivery of S-300's have become a barometer of our bilateral relations."It turned out to be a positive indicator. In September, Russian officials announced the cancellation of a years-old agreement to sell Iran a potentially game-changing air defense system. The Iranians have been crying foul ever since, vowing to take Russia to court over the end of an arms transfer worth an estimated $800 million. But it's hardly a mere financial issue. The S-300 can shoot down enemy aircraft from up to 200 kilometers away, making it a system that "scares every Western air force," in the words of defense analyst Dan Goure. No wonder the U.S. and Israel worked aggressively to stop the sale - an effort whose scale is detailed in the diplomatic cables released on Sunday by the anti-secrecy organization WikiLeaks. Almost as soon as the Obama administration came into office, diplomats in the Mideast were ordered to turn regional fears of Iran into pressure on Russia not to follow through on the missile sale. CLIP

WikiLeaks' Cablegate: The Taiwanese Animated Version - EXCELLENT AND FUNNY!
The Taiwanese news-animation company NMA has distilled the global diplomatic furor sparked by the State Department cable leak into a 90-second computer generated highlight reel. Think of it as worldwide anarchy in a CGI format.

Sweden issues international arrest warrant for WikiLeaks founder Assange (19 November 2010)
Swedish authorities, stepping up their persecution of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, have issued an international arrest warrant for his detention in relation to trumped-up “rape” charges.Sweden’s Director of Prosecution, Marianne Ny, claims that Assange needs to be questioned. “So far, we have not been able to meet with him to accomplish the interrogations,” she said. The court ruling will allow prosecutors to seek assistance from other nations to have him arrested.The case against Assange is aimed at discrediting or weakening WikiLeaks, which has made public hundreds of thousands of secret US documents exposing the criminal character of the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq. (See “The WikiLeaks documents and the rape of Iraq”) The Swedish prosecutor’s campaign has all the hallmarks of a “dirty tricks” operation organized or encouraged by either the Pentagon or the CIA, or both. The charges have nothing to do with sexual assault, despite screaming media headlines. They relate to Assange’s encounters this past summer with two Swedish women. Rebutting prosecutor Ny’s comments in a strongly worded statement Tuesday, Mark Stephens, one of Assange’s British lawyers, explained that the allegations “do not constitute what any advanced legal system considers to be rape; as various media outlets have reported ‘the basis for the rape charge’ purely seems to constitute a post-facto dispute over consensual, but unprotected sex days after the event.”The charges against Assange were, in fact, properly dropped last August within 24 hours by chief prosecutor Eva Finne, who found there was no “reason to suspect that he [Assange] had committed rape.” However, Assange’s identity had already been unlawfully disclosed to the right-wing media by the Swedish authorities. Stephens asserts, “The so called ‘rape’ story was carried around the world and has caused Mr. Assange and his organization irreparable harm.” CLIP - More through The Persecution of WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks : dans les coulisses de la diplomatie américaine


Pentagon to test 2nd near-space strike craft - Weapon designed for urgent threats (November 25, 2010)
Defense Department scientists are set to conduct a second test launch next year of the Falcon HTV-2 experimental superweapon after the first flight this year ended when the autopilot deliberately crashed the unmanned glider into the ocean as a safety measure.The Falcon Hypersonic Test Vehicle is designed to skim the top of the atmosphere just below space, and is a key element of the Pentagon's Conventional Prompt Global Strike (CPGS) capability - a program to build non-nuclear strategic weapons that can strike conventionally anywhere in the world in less than an hour. (...) The $308 million Falcon HTV-2 is a suborbital near-space vehicle launched on a Minotaur rocket, a solid-fuel booster built from a decommissioned ballistic missile. On the very edge of the atmosphere, in a procedure called "clamshell payload fairing release," the launch missile deploys the plane, which is then supposed to glide above the Earth at more than 13,000 miles per hour - more than 20 times the speed of sound. The Pentagon is developing a generation of such hypersonic weapons as a way of being able to strike quickly at urgent threats - such as preparations by terrorists or rogue states to use nuclear weapons. The issue has been lent urgency by the recent nuclear arms treaty negotiated with Russia. Specialists say the new generation of hypersonic strike craft would not count against the limits the treaty places on strategic weapons, although in treaty negotiations, U.S. officials promised to discuss the new weapons in a treaty consultation commission. CLIP - COULD THIS BE USED IN A SURPRISE ATTACK AGAINST IRAN'S DEEP UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR INSTALLATIONS?

"For the first time in history there is agreement that Iran is the threat."

- Netanyahu

"Wikileaks certainly is an interesting turn of events to say the least! It has lit up the mainstream, the blogstream, and alterna-stream by changing the traditional rules of the game quite a bit! A rattlesnake never bites before it rattles its tail to warn its victim. Wikileaks seems like it is being used to rattle to someone!.

- Anonymous comment posted HERE on 30 Nov 201O


"In fact, this 'revelation' about Iran's capability to threaten Europe is even more believable than the 'sexed-up' Iraq dossier claim, because this revelation comes from Wiki-leaks, an honest-to-god whistle blower organization, right? I mean, there's just no way that agents working on behalf of the US and Israeli governments could possibly use such an organization to spread propaganda, right? (...) Is there no one in the alternative news community that can see this for what it is? North Korea supplying missiles to Iran to attack Europe?! Right when the US and Israel are involved in a protracted effort to demonize Iran to the world and the US has an aircraft carrier sitting off the Korean Coast!? Is all of this meant to be so obvious, or did my reading of 'psychological operations for dummies' gift me with amazing insight into how political propaganda really works? In determining the origin of the Wiki-leaks documents, we need ask ourselves but one question: in whose interest is it to put pressure on the US government through the release of documents to the press (via Wiki-leaks) that force the US to do a certain amount of damage control, while simultaneously portraying Iran as the biggest threat to world peace? Because that, in the final analysis, is the overall effect of the Wiki-leaks documents. Wiki-leaks performs so poorly in the 'smell test' that I feel confident in suggesting that the documents may not even be original documents; and if they are, they have very likely been amended in such a way that they serve the Israeli/Zionist agenda."

- Joe Quinn - Taken from Wiki-Leaks Serves Israeli Agenda Of Demonizing Iran below


NOTE from Jean: After I wrote my lengthy intro note to the previous article I found this related comment below expressing several similar views... A MUST READ!


Wiki-Leaks Serves Israeli Agenda Of Demonizing Iran

by - 30 Nov 2010

I obviously missed the momentous occasion when the mainstream media turned anti-war. But who can now deny that it is so when we see Wiki-leaks and the mainstream media joining forces to expose the ugly truth of the US invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, and more recently, what the US state department thinks of world leaders? I mean, that is what is happening, right?


What is happening is that Wiki-leaks is being promoted by the media in order to sell the same old lies, except that now the lies are coming sugar-coated, with a 'whistle-blower' gloss to better enable digestion. The lies themselves don't frustrate me so much anymore, and I can understand why the general public are fooled, but I have to admit to being disappointed at how effortlessly the Wiki-leaks poison is being swallowed by so many supposedly alternative news sites. Sites like Counterpunch, Global Research, Citizens for a Legitimate Government and Information Clearing House, to name but a few, are all disseminating the Wiki-leaks story without so much as a hint of critical thought it seems.

">From day one, the Wiki-leaks Afghan - and then Iraq - war logs revealed little if anything that was not already publicly available:

That the US uses assassination squads in Iraq and Afghanistan? Old news. Seven years ago the Guardian informed us that not only were US 'hit squads' operating in Iraq, but that they were being trained by the Israelis! And in any case, is the idea that 'hit squads' are being used to track down the evil 'Taliban' in Afghanistan more appalling than the fact, splashed across American broadsheets earlier this year, that Obama signed a bill authorizing the assassination of American citizens by the CIA?

That the US pays the Iraqi and Afghan media for positive coverage is not only old news, it's only half the story! Have we already forgotten the Lincoln Group and the precocious Christian Bailey? In 2005 the Lincoln group won (was awarded) a $100 Million contract to essentially control the entire Iraqi media via its own 'Iraqi' publications and the monopolization of the Iraqi advertising industry on an ongoing basis. All of these details have been carried in the mainstream press, yet they have done nothing to stop the bogus endless 'war on terrorism'. Why then are we being encouraged to expect that the Wikileaks documents, which convey the same information, will fare any better? Is it because these details will soon be consigned to the memory hole (again) while other, more strategically important, details will be repeated ad nauseum?

That the US has killed thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan? Old news. In fact, on this one, the Wiki-leaks documents offered support for the much lower estimation of deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan by the discredited 'Iraq Body Count' rather than the much more realistic estimation of almost 1.5 million (in Iraq) by Just Foreign Policy

But quibbling over the number of dead Muslims is not important these days anyway, after all, they're only Muslims, not real people, and the over-all exposure by the mainstream media of US misdeeds in Iraq and Afghanistan is, in itself, no bad thing. If Wiki-leaks left it at that, I would be more than happy to applaud the mysterious Mr Assange and the equally mysterious provenance of his documents. But the Wiki-leaks documents tell much more than arbitrary killing in wars of conquest, they also provide support for the continuation and expansion of those wars, most notably to Iran and Pakistan.

For example, the Afghan 'war logs' offered 'evidence' that Pakistan is helping the Taliban - that's Pakistan, and not, as has been reported, the CIA:

Persistent accounts of western forces in Afghanistan using their helicopters to ferry Taleban fighters, strongly denied by the military, is feeding mistrust of the forces that are supposed to be bringing order to the country.

One such tale came from a soldier from the 209th Shahin Corps of the Afghan National Army, fighting against the growing insurgency in Kunduz province in northern Afghanistan. Over several months, he had taken part in several pitched battles against the armed opposition.

"Just when the police and army managed to surround the Taleban in a village of Qala-e-Zaal district, we saw helicopters land with support teams," he said. "They managed to rescue their friends from our encirclement, and even to inflict defeat on the Afghan National Army."

The UK Guardian's summation of the Afghan war logs was this:

- How a secret "black" unit of special forces hunts down Taliban leaders for "kill or capture" without trial.

- How the US covered up evidence that the Taliban have acquired deadly surface-to-air missiles.

- How NATO commanders fear neighbouring Pakistan and Iran are fueling the insurgency.

- How the Taliban have caused growing carnage with a massive escalation of their roadside bombing campaign, which has killed more than 2,000 civilians to date.

Are these the type of revelations that are going to cause serious problems for the US governments? Are they going to outrage the public? Having been conditioned for years to believe that the 'Taliban' are evil monsters, are people going to be angry or quietly proud that a 'secret special forces unit' is hunting the Taliban down 'without trial'?

Does the 'revelation' that the Taliban acquired surface-to-air missiles damage or bolster the US government claim that they are fighting a war against a formidable foe in Afghanistan? Of what significance is it that the coalition covered up this alleged 'fact'?

And the data that the Taliban 'massively escalated their roadside bombing campaign, killing more than 2,000 civilians'; is this damaging to the US government, or 'evidence' that the US is fighting the good fight in Afghanistan?

The other English paper that ran with the Afghan 'war logs' was the NY Times. Their headline summation told us:

Pakistan Spy Service Aids Insurgents, Reports Assert

The fate of Combat Outpost Keating illustrates many of the frustrations of the allied effort: low troop levels, unreliable Afghan partners and a growing insurgency.

The military and intelligence reports provide a real-time history of the Afghan war from the vantage point of American troops actually doing the fighting and reconstruction.

So, thanks to Wiki-leaks, the unlikely darling of the mainstream media, the world is being informed that the 'enemy' in Afghanistan is growing stronger, Pakistan and Iran are to blame, and brave US troops are engaged in 'reconstruction' there!

But Pakistan and the Taliban are not the main target of disinformation in these documents. As more documents are released, it becomes clear that, sitting square in the bulls-eye, is Iran. The initial round of leaks provided this sensational 'revelation', reported here by the UK Telegraph:

Wiki-leaks: how Iran devised new suicide vest for al-Qaeda to use in Iraq

Iranian-backed forces supplied insurgents attacking coalition troops and devised new forms of suicide vests for al-Qaeda, according to assessments released by Wiki-leaks.

Only in their wildest dreams could the war-mongers in Washington and Tel Aviv have wished for a more on-message leak of 'secret information'.

And so to the latest raft of documents, partially released just a few days ago. When I read their contents, to say that I was shocked would be to grossly over-state my reaction. I could have written them myself:

Wiki-leaks: Iran 'obtains North Korea missiles which can strike Europe'

This one, I have to admit, is entirely believable because, after all, everyone knows Saddam had the same capability several years ago, remember? In fact, this 'revelation' about Iran's capability to threaten Europe is even more believable than the 'sexed-up' Iraq dossier claim, because this revelation comes from Wiki-leaks, an honest-to-god whistle blower organization, right? I mean, there's just no way that agents working on behalf of the US and Israeli governments could possibly use such an organization to spread propaganda, right?

Is there no one in the alternative news community that can see this for what it is? North Korea supplying missiles to Iran to attack Europe?! Right when the US and Israel are involved in a protracted effort to demonize Iran to the world and the US has an aircraft carrier sitting off the Korean Coast!? Is all of this meant to be so obvious, or did my reading of 'psychological operations for dummies' gift me with amazing insight into how political propaganda really works?

Does anyone truly believe that the fact that someone in the US State Department thinks that Sarkozy is an 'Emperor with no clothes' will do any real damage? Is this meant to be a secret? It is certainly no secret to over 60% of the French public who, years ago, openly stated as much. Likewise the 'revelation' about Berlusconi; 'feckless, vain and ineffective as a modern European leader'? What about 'senile, megalomaniac, psychopath, pedophile' this is what the Italians and most Europeans are saying, does the US State Department not read the papers before compiling 'secret dossiers' on foreign leaders?

And what of the the North Korean dictator Kim Jong-il? He's a 'flabby old chap' according to these 'damaging reports'. Is this meant to cause some kind of diplomatic rift between North Korea and Washington before or after the USA and its client state of South Korea bombs Kim and a few million North Koreans back to the stone age? And Iranian President Ahmadinejad - 'Hitler'?? Does anyone expect the Obama government to want to retract that one or hide it from the public? More to the point, are we all suffering from collective amnesia? Who has repeatedly referred to Iran and it's democratically-elected leader as Nazi Germany and a new Hitler? Anyone? Ok, here's a hint.

Ok, so I mentioned Israel a couple of times. Why? Here's one reason, from the horse's mouth: In Israel the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said that he felt vindicated by [Wiki-leaks] revelations about the extent of international and Arab concern about Iran and its nuclear programme. "Israel has not been damaged at all by the WikiLeaks publications," Netayahu said.

"The documents show many sources backing Israel's assessments, particularly of Iran. Our region has been hostage to a narrative that is the result of 60 years of propaganda, which paints Israel as the greatest threat. In reality leaders understand that that view is bankrupt. For the first time in history there is agreement that Iran is the threat," he said.

There is also the fact that it is public knowledge that Israel operates an extensive and very well-entrenched network of spies in the US, including the infamous Israeli art students.

In 2005 the FBI noted, for example, that Israel maintains "an active program to gather proprietary information within the United States." A key Israeli method, said the FBI report, is computer intrusion.

And what are we to make of the strange coincidence where, on the very same day that Wiki-leaks releases documents that contain key data about the Iranian nuclear program, the Israeli Mossad murders one Iranian nuclear scientist and injures another in Tehran?

In determining the origin of the Wiki-leaks documents, we need ask ourselves but one question: in whose interest is it to put pressure on the US government through the release of documents to the press (via Wiki-leaks) that force the US to do a certain amount of damage control, while simultaneously portraying Iran as the biggest threat to world peace? Because that, in the final analysis, is the overall effect of the Wiki-leaks documents. Wiki-leaks performs so poorly in the 'smell test' that I feel confident in suggesting that the documents may not even be original documents; and if they are, they have very likely been amended in such a way that they serve the Israeli/Zionist agenda.


Related article:

Yossi Melman: Mossad, MI6, the CIA and the case of the assassinated scientist (30 November 2010)
Three events - not seemingly related - took place yesterday. The leaking of State Department documents, many of which deal with the world's concerns about Iran's nuclear programme; the mysterious assassination in Tehran of a top Iranian nuclear scientist and the wounding of another, and the appointment of Tamir Pardo as the new head of Mossad, Israel's foreign espionage agency. But there's a link between them. They are part of the endless efforts by the Israeli intelligence community, together with its Western counterparts including Britain's MI6 and America's CIA, to sabotage, delay and if possible, to stop Iran from reaching its goal of having its first nuclear bomb. The attack on the two scientists, one of them mentioned as a top nuclear scientist working with Iran's Ministry of Defence, was part of these efforts. No organisation claimed responsibility but it is obvious, not just because of accusations by Iranian officials and Iran's media, that Israel was behind it. Most experts who follow Middle East politics and Mossad history would agree. It is at least the fourth attempt to assassinate Iranian scientists linked with the country's nuclear programme in four years. There were probably other attempts which did not hit the headlines. The attribution to Mossad is not because of the use of motorcycles, though in the past Mossad has been involved in similar operations. The best known one was in 1995 in Valletta, Malta, when a Mossad hit-team liquidated Dr Fathi Shkaki, the leader of the Islamic Jihad. It has more to do with the policy of Mossad to deal a blow to Iran's nuclear programme. On top of assassinating nuclear scientists to terrorise others and force some to quit, it is believed that Mossad was also behind penetrating Iranian purchasing networks and selling them flawed equipment of its nuclear enrichment centrifuges and most recently by planting a virus which has damaged the nuclear computers at Natanz. Yet despite these daring ploys, it is obvious to Israeli decision-makers as well as to western leaders that if a country is determined enough to develop nuclear weapons nothing would stop it.




Michael Rivero

Wikileaks, following much media fanfare (reason for suspicion right there) has just released a huge number of documents supposedly leaked to WikiLeaks and no other websites'. The media is denouncing this as a threat to the United States while US politicians wring their hands and wonder when they will be free of the curse of the First Amendment and all that troublesome nonsense about Freedom of Speech. Many observers think this is a propaganda set up and that neither Julian Assange or WikiLaeks should be taken at face value. After all, Julian Assange keeps insisting there was no 9-11 conspiracy and the 9-11 truth movement a "distraction." Apparently Julian Assange has patented conspiracy and nobody else may expose one except himself!

Of course, there is really not that much that is new in this latest dump. Like prior WikiLeaks dumps, most of it is old news mixed with some rather dubious claims. In his last such dump, Julian Assange included a claim that Osama bin Laden is still alive and controlling Al Qaeda. Of course, it is well documented outside the United States that Osama bin Laden has been dead for many years and that Al Qaeda itself is a fake front group created to hoax Americans into endless wars of conquest, much as the fictional Emmanuel Goldstein was used in George Orwell's "1984."

In yet another infamous propaganda attempt, WikiLeaks tried to claim that weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, justifying the invasion. No such weapons were ever found.

As for the present batch of documents, again it is a rehash of stories already known to the blog-o-sphere. Even those people who did not know US diplomats spy on their United Nations counterparts did not find it surprising or in any way a new idea.

So what is the real purpose of Assange's little charade? Propaganda.

Propaganda is like rat poison. 95% of it is tasty, healthy food. But the purpose is to get you to swallow the poison. The same is true of the WikiLeaks document dump. The bait are all these old stories which we already knew about, used to convince us that the entire pile is "tasty, healthy food," except that it isn't. Buried in the pile of delicious, albeit past the expiration date morsels are the bits of poison which the US Government knows you will no longer accept at face value from the controlled media, but hope you will eat if handed to you by a con artist posing as hostile to the government.

So, given that 95% of the current WikiLeaks is really old news, as a public service I will point out the bits of poison that Julian hopes you will eat.

1. Iran is bad so you should all want to kill them.

2. Saudi Arabia is bad because they are funding Al Qaeda so you should all want to kill them.

3. North Korea is bad because they gave really long range missiles to Iran for Iran to put their nuclear warheads in, so you should all want to kill them.

4. China is messing with your computers, so you should all want to kill them.

That about sums it up. Oh yes, there is nothing negative about Israel in all these diplomatic messages, an impossibility given the lethal Israeli attack on the Aid Flotilla last May. That suggests who Assange really works for.

If WikiLeaks were really bad, why doesn't DHS, which did not hesitate to takeover dozens of domains this last week for copyright infringement, not take over WikiLeaks domain for "National Security?" Clearly, the US Government wants you to read the "leaks!"


Related articles:

Wikileaks and The Tel Aviv Connection (Nov-29-2010)
(TEMPE, Az.) - What is Tel Aviv to do now that it’s known Israelis and pro-Israelis ‘fixed’ the intelligence that induced the U.S. to war in Iraq? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Con me consistently for six decades and the relationship is over, as is Israel’s credibility as a legitimate nation state.Tel Aviv knows this. But what can the Zionist state do about it? Answer: Wikileaks.Why now? Misdirection. Shine the spotlight on Washington to take it off Tel Aviv. That’s good old-fashioned psy-ops. And challenge the credibility of the U.S. That’s Wikileaks. Any credible forensics would start by asking: to whose benefit? Then look to means, motive and opportunity plus the presence of stable nation-state intelligence inside the U.S.Tepid Support will not Suffice - Obama has behaved as anticipated by those who produced his presidency. Anyone surprised at the lack of change in U.S. policy in the Middle East fails to grasp the power of the Israel lobby.Did he hesitate to support their latest Israeli strategy for scuttling peace negotiations? Absent peace, the U.S. will continue to be the target of those outraged at America’s unflinching support for Israel’s thuggish behavior in pursuit of its expansionist goals. Confirming the lobby’s influence, Netanyahu announced he would not agree to halt settlements on Palestinian land until Obama reduced to writing a $3 billion bribe. In return for a proposed 90-day freeze, what form of bribe will America provide? Twenty F-35 jets at $150 million each plus parts, maintenance, training and armaments. (...) Wikileaks’ release of confidential diplomatic cables provides Israel an opportunity to undermine U.S. relations worldwide while also inflicting lasting damage on U.S. interests in the Middle East. After this, what nation would trust the U.S. to maintain a confidence? In October, Turkey asked that the U.S. not share intelligence with Israel. Now who dares share intelligence with the U.S.? This may signal the beginning of the end for the Obama presidency his domestic policy failures are eclipsed by his failures in foreign policy.This may also signal pre-staging for the 2012 presidential primary with a weakened Obama forced to name Clinton as his running mate or stepping aside so she can lead the ballot.Her 2008 presidential campaign promised recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state” and promised an “undivided Jerusalem as the capital.” Tel Aviv was elated. A second Clinton presidency would ensure another victory for Israel—and no peace.

Wikileaks Is Zionist Poison (October 28, 2010)
Disinformation is defined as ‘misinformation that is deliberately disseminated in order to influence or confuse rivals.’ It is used by governments to mislead and brainwash their citizen populations, instigate wars, and blackmail foreign regimes. It is the ultimate instrument of the media. The most effective disinformation is that which is comprised of falsehood as well as facts. Wikileaks, founded by Julian Assange, fits this description perfectly, right down to the letter. Seemingly overnight, it has become one of the biggest ‘whistle-blowing’ agencies in modern history. In reality though, it is one of the biggest disinformation projects in modern history, and it may be the most dangerous because it is masquerading as an organization of truth. The information released by Wikileaks isn’t new; it isn’t groundbreaking; it doesn’t hurt the US as much as people think, it’s fractional really; and it is overloaded with as much as propaganda as the day-to-day Zionist media is. This propaganda is benefitting someone. And that someone is the illegal usurping entity of Israel. Even the Israeli government itself thinks so (1). CLIP

Wikileaks is like a TV show that never gets off the ground. We started with a “shoot ‘em up” in Iraq, the helicopter slaughter soon forgotten and move on to, well, what? We got a deluge of material from Afghanistan, carefully gleaned to point fingers at Pakistan. When it came down to backing any of it up, it went nowhere.Considering the massive corruption and drug scandals, even the revelations that President Karzai has been in negotiations with pranksters pretending to be the Taliban, all the really juicy stuff from Afghanistan must have been in another drawer. Then we got Iraq. Ah, Iraq. There, we could check. We know the people who wrote the leaked material. They told us Wikileaks edited it, altered it, redacted it more than the Pentagon. The “Iraq War Log” was, well…phony. There is one thing that has been consistent about Wikileaks and our prediction is that this next batch, reputed to be millions of highly sensitive documents, will prove our point. Wikileaks is Israel. Wikileaks is an intelligence operation to weaken and undermine the American government, orchestrated from Tel Aviv, using dozens of operatives, dual citizens, some at the highest authority levels, spies for Israel. Through leaking carefully selected intelligence along with proven falsified documents, all fed to a controlled press, fully complicit, Wikileaks is, in fact, an act of war against the United States. - CHECK ALSO GORDON DUFF: “AIPAC ORDERED BUSH TO ATTACK IRAN

This last week, in a lawsuit over an AIPAC, (Israel’s lobby) employee reputedly fired for being caught spying against the US, news stories across the United States reported that, as part of that $20 million civil case, evidence will be presented that masses of classified material come to AIPAC and Israel continually. Is AIPAC Wikileaks? The only evidence of any massive leak discovered in the Pentagon is AIPAC.

If dual citizens who make up much of the Pentagon’s leadership are working with Israel or AIPAC to formulate Wikileaks, as seems to be the case, then the upcoming leak will serve a pro-Israeli agenda, even if it damages the United States, as other Wikileaks have. These are Israeli agenda items:Discrediting Obama foreign policy in order to weaken the president’s influence with congress to push for a halt on new settlements in Palestine and the forced removal of Islamic property owners. Accusations involving Turkey, now feuding with Israel over the killing of Turkish citizens on the Mavi Marmara, now recognized as a purely humanitarian mission. These accusations against Turkey may include weapons being supplied to terrorists in Iraq, a fanciful abuse of reality. What will not be reported, if this story is “leaked” either through Wikileaks or the other Israeli sources, “Debka”..”Stratfor”..””..or the infamous “” is Israel’s 40 years of complicity in the very acts they now accuse Turkey of.More importantly, is the issue of blaming Turkey for the actions of the terrorist group, PKK, long funded by Israel and now claimed to be allied to Al Qaeda, is vital to Israel’s strategy against Turkey.Expect Pakistan to be hit, as usual. An Islamic nuclear power with a top rate million man army that outclasses Israel hands down, Pakistan, primary competitor for US aid dollars, a country that actually has agreements with the United States and real troops fighting alongside Americans, will get their usual Wikileaks bashing.

Is it a coincidence that documents regarding Israel, their spying, influence peddling, suspicions of complicity in terrorism, Yemen, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, across Europe and even the Detroit bombing, those reports are there, they are classified but you will never see one on Wikileaks. In fact, they are the only classified information that never gets out to the news. Is that because, as we have learned, the borders of Israel extend well into Washington DC, well into the Pentagon? What won’t we see in Wikileaks:Nothing in Wikileaks will accuse anyone, even Pakistan or Afghanistan, or complicity in narcotics trafficking nor mention the huge new narcotics industry operating in Iraq. Ask yourself why.One of the biggest areas of complaint in the Pentagon, more classified White Papers have been written on this than anything else: “How Israel is Endangering the United States“In fact, the biggest “classified” debate in America is what supporting Israel, a nation with incredible wealth and utterly obnoxious leaders costs the United States. Rumors of such issues aren’t rumors at all. When General Petraeus presented his now famous power-point presentation to Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, outlining how Israel is undermining American foreign policy, he wasn’t operating without tens of thousands of pages of intelligence behind him. Not one page, not one word of these studies will be in Wikileaks. CLIP



Is the Internet 9/11 Under Way?

By Zen Gardner - 4 December 2010

Think about it. Where is this seemingly staged Wikileaks furor taking us? While we participate in digging into the juicy tidbits of information that incriminate just about anybody and everybody, where is it all going?
Lessons of 9/11

While 9/11 served as a wake up call to those awake and aware enough to see the obvious demolitions and misinformation and resultant "Pearl Harbor" effect, most of the world fell for it. And now people are literally bending over, as in airport 'screenings', to the onslaught of police state fascism worldwide. It's staggering. In fact, it's Orwellian. The armies, police and private sector are at war with the vague concept of terrorism - an unbeatable enemy in a war that can be drawn out indefinitely and fought in any arena necessary.

And what was the result of this declared war on terrorism? Not a war on terror, but an increase in fear and terror, all to justify the economic, social and political clampdown that has followed.

What will the Wikileaks debacle herald?

You guessed it--the last bastion of freedom of information and expression, a free Internet, will topple. After all, if information is now the enemy, we must carefully police any and every aspect of this dangerous medium--all for the safety and protection of 'we the people'.

Oh, we'll still have the Internet, just like you can still fly. You'll just have to be on the "approved" list, screened, stamped, zapped, mugged and molested if you want to get "on the net". No biggie. Thanks Julian--job well done.

Warning Signs

#1. Wikileaks---WAY too approved and publicized. Every TV and cable network, press worldwide, official recognition from every level of government. Heck, he even does a TED talk! Where's anyone else trying to expose the agenda? Only Julian. Hmmm.

#2. Biggie: This supposed system fighter says the 9/11 truth issue is "a distraction". Mustn't step on your bosses' toes now, should we Julian.. Very suspicious if you ask me.

#3. Wikileaks and Assange's sketchy background:

The WikiLeaks website first appeared on the Internet in December 2006.[15][16] The site claims to have been "founded by Chinese dissidents, journalists, mathematicians and start-up company technologists, from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa".[5] The creators of WikiLeaks have not been formally identified.[17] It has been represented in public since January 2007 by Julian Assange and others. Assange describes himself as a member of WikiLeaks' advisory board.[18] (Wikipedia)

Also, Assange reportedly wrote for both the New York Times and the Economist which is fishy as well--not a real enlightened or 'alternative' mindset. His mysterious persona also plays well to the Wikileaks furtive image so people won't expect to know too much, which also is very 'convenient' for keeping anything hidden.
[NOTE: There doesn't have to be deliberate, conscious involvement in some agenda on Wikileaks' part, but it helps. He, they, could be 'useful idiots' whose program has been conveniently co-opted by the controllers to serve their purpose. Either way, look for the pattern and the effects.]

#4. Watch the hype: There's a growing crescendo of anger and hate that is now being whipped up--to the point that Assange is being called a new kind of terrorist--and more disturbingly, and as expected, the comparison is now being drawn between Assange and Bin Laden:

Social Media Leaks Categorize Julian Assange As the Osama Bin Laden Of The Internet

The founder of WikiLeaks is not only a wanted man by the American authorities, his now infamous Web site

WikiLeaks is also under attack by notorious hackers, while its services are being cut-off by Amazon and Although not officially announced, Julian Assange might be considered today's public enemy number-one, taking the place of the illusive Osama bin Laden. Not since 9/11 has any one figure reached such notoriety due to what many consider acts against a state.

Like bin Laden, Assange has no permanent address, does not maintain a headquarters, employs only a select few confidants and has taken to hiding in covert areas. Younger than bin Laden, Assange at 39 years-old may be a little more mobile than the 53 year-old, choosing to hopscotch the globe versus hibernating in the mountains of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

While his face resides on the covers of magazines and newspapers around the world, similar to a Wild West 'Wanted' poster, little is known about his day-to-day activities. Like bin Laden's video addresses, while the CIA and other mercenaries are seeking his where-a-bouts, it's amazing that he still finds ways to release updates justifying his actions. (SOURCE)
Notice also how we've been hearing about Wikileaks' exploits for a few years now, giving us time to make the connection between it and sensational and 'destructive informational terrorism'. Similarly we heard about Osama through the Yemen and Nairobi attacks being attibuted to him, imprinting his "brand" on the collective mind which led to the foregone phony conclusion that he had masterminded the 9/11 attacks.
Ah, 'But what about these apparent exposures? Would they attack their own?'
Could all these serious indictments against their own just be a deflecting smokescreen to hide the real purpose? Sure worked last time. So why wouldn't they risk taking down some of their own to give this psychological operation credibility?

Pentagon strikes 'its own' on 9/11---need I say more?

The Tactic Is Very Familiar - Know Your Enemy

First there's the Hegelian Dialectic - create a problem, provoke a reaction and then implement the pre-planned solution. The staged 9/11 attacks, including the internationally inhabited World Trade Center, 'justified' the ensuing wars and worldwide clampdown on freedoms in the name of 'security', including the horrendous Patriot Act that was already written and just waiting for an excuse to be signed and implemented.
Similarly, this attack over the international Internet and drawing in diplomatic communities worldwide by exposing state secrets from a variety of countries will greatly help usher in international measures in the name of 'security', probably spearheaded once again by the fascist US government with coinciding EU, Canadian & Australian measures. It's already under way with the Department of Homeland Security confiscating websites.

All they need is 'the right incident" to justify bringing on full control. Like "Internet Terrorism"? They just can't use that term enough now, can they. After all, it's a war on terror, and "if you're not for us, you're for the terrorists." The ultimate false choice, just like everything else they foist on the human consciousness.
Pretty clever these ol' boys. It's in their blood.

Those manipulating world events belong to a cult, a brotherhood that hides behind many names and guises, and to which they pledge their absolute loyalty above everything, even their own flesh and blood. Commonly referred to as the Illuminati, this cult has an agenda they work to fulfill using certain rituals, methods and tactics.

One of their central themes and modus operandums is "Ordo Ab Chao"-- order out of chaos. Create the chaos, pitting anyone against anyone while controlling and fomenting both sides--hence the double headed red phoenix symbol-- for any reason, even killing or exposing their own, to create an illogical madness that they think only they can see through and understand. All the while they are manipulating world governments, banks, armies and corporate leaders and drawing the net on the outcome they have already planned.

Fear and confusion is the climate they love to foment. As long as there's a confused and uninformed populace, the ignorant and fearful masses will be crying out for help from the 'powers that be' - the very "powers that be" that caused all the problems in the first place.

They're not out to help, they're out to control. At any cost, by any means necessary.



Is Wikileaks being manipulated by an intelligence service?

By Alan Hart

The Wikileaks revelation that some Persian Gulf Arab leaders wanted (and still want?) America to attack Iran is confirmation of what some of us thought we knew – that Arab leaders are not merely impotent but as dangerously deluded as their Israeli counterparts.

Netanyahu was absolutely correct when he told a group of editors in Tel Aviv that “Israel has not been damaged at all by the Wikileaks publications.” A senior Israeli government official went further in his response to questions from AFP. He said: “We have come out looking good.” The leaked documents, he added, “confirm that the whole Middle East is terrified by the prospect of a nuclear Iran… The Arab countries are pushing the United States towards military action more forcefully than Israel.”

Actually the assertion that “the whole Middle East is terrified by the prospect of a nuclear Iran” is nonsense. The Arab regimes which more or less do the bidding of America-and-Zionism are terrified, but the same cannot be said of many of their repressed subjects. As Noam Chomsky pointed out in a recent interview with Open Democracy’s Amy Goodman, a poll of Arab opinion indicates that 80% regard Israel as the major threat in the region. Iran is seen as a threat by only 10%. The poll also indicated that 57% believe the region would be a more safe place if Iran had nuclear weapons. (As with Israel/Palestine, the regimes are effectively on one side – that of America-and-Israel, and the Arab masses are on the other side – that of the Palestinians).

The only good news confirmed by the latest Wiki leaked documents is that President Obama has so far resisted pressure from both Israel and the Arabs. (In fairness it should not be forgotten that President George “Dubya” Bush also said “No” to an attack on Iran when Vice President Cheney wanted him to authorize it).

There is no mystery about why any U.S. president who is not completely nuts will refuse to authorize an American attack on Iran (and do his best to stop Israel going it alone, no doubt with clearance through Saudi airspace). An American attack on Iran would have huge and possibly incalculable consequences for American interests. It would set in motion an escalating and possibly unending counter offensive including unbridled terrorism against American forces and facilities (civilian and business as well as military) around the world. And while that was happening, what is left of the global economy could be wrecked by sustained rises in the price of oil.

If those Arab leaders who pressed America to attack Iran discount the catastrophe scenario indicated above, they are very, very irresponsible. But there is more to their folly.

I don’t believe Iran’s ruling mullahs want nuclear weapons, but under pressure from the Revolutionary Guards (the real power in the country when push comes to shove?), they may have agreed in principle a while ago that Iran should have at least the possibility of developing a nuclear bomb for deterrence.

Prior to the publication of Wiki’s latest leaks, the question of how far and how fast Iran should go to have the possibility of developing a nuclear bomb was still the subject of debate in the leadership in all of its manifestations. It may be that Wiki’s revelations will play into the hands of those in Tehran who are insisting that Iran must have a nuclear bomb for deterrence.

While I was absorbing what the Wiki leaks confirmed about the attitudes of Arab leaders, I asked myself this question: What would I want if I was an Iranian, even one who hated the present regime?

My answer?

I would want my government, whatever its composition, to crash ahead with developing a nuclear bomb for deterrence. I would tell myself that was the only way to keep Iran safe from Arab-backed Israeli threats. And when challenged in argument, I would say, “Do you think America and Britain would have invaded Iraq if Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons?”

My main point?

If Iran does become a nuclear-armed state, it will be because of Israeli threats and Arab leadership’s endorsement of them.

Now to a most controversial question, one at least as controversial as the various 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Is Wikileaks being manipulated by intelligence services – one or several?

There are a number of bloggers – some of them informed writers with credibility, some of them uninformed, anti-Semitic conspiracy theory nutters – who think the answer is “Yes”. More to the point is that no less a figure than Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter’s National Security Advisor, thinks the answer could be “Yes”. He said so in an interview with PBS’s Judy Woodruff and also in a subsequent BBC World Service (Radio) interview.

To Judy Woodruff he said:

“The real issue is, who is feeding Wikileaks? They’re getting a lot of information which seems trivial, inconsequential, but some of it seems surprisingly pointed… The very pointed references to Arab leaders could have as their objective undermining their political credibility at home, because this kind of public identification of their hostility towards Iran could actually play against them at home…It’s a question of whether Wikileaks are being manipulated by interested parties that want to either complicate our relationship with other governments or want to undermine some governments… I have no doubt that Wikileaks is getting a lot of the stuff from sort of relatively unimportant sources, like the one that perhaps is identified on the air. But it may be getting stuff at the same time from interested intelligence parties who want to manipulate the process and achieve certain very specific objectives.”

Another way to look at the matter is to ask this question. If a visitor from Outer Space studied the first two days of Wikileak’s revelations, what preliminary conclusion would he (or she) come to?

I think it’s entirely possible that he (or she) would say: “The main message is clear. Iran is the biggest single threat to the peace of the region and the world and not only because the Israelis say so. Arab leaders agree with them. The secondary message is that apart from the Arab leaders who say they share Israel’s assessment, other Muslim leaders, those in Turkey and Pakistan especially, are not to be trusted.”

And here’s another question. Which party benefited most from the first two days of Wikileaks revelations? The obvious answer is the Zionist state of Israel.

I must also confess that I have a nagging worry (small but real) about the possibility that Julian Paul Assange, Wikileaks’ founder, has been compromised in some way and is open to manipulation. My concern on this account is the fact that he is a 9/11 conspiracy denier. He is firmly on the record as saying: “I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.”

As I have said on public platforms in America and written in a number of articles for the worldwide web, I think there is irrefutable evidence that the Twin Towers were not brought down by the planes and their burning fuel.

My own conclusion at the present time is that I don’t have a conclusion; but I think the question of whether or not Wikileaks is being manipulated, and if so by whom, is worthy of deep and serious investigation.


Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East. His Latest book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, is a three-volume epic in its American edition. He blogs on and tweets on



U.S. intelligence retaliates against Israel's role in Wikileaks's disclosures

Dec 2, 2010

With Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, continuing their gloating over the disclosure by Wikileaks of classified U.S. State Department cables, the U.S. intelligence community is taking off its gloves and is releasing some embarrassing information about Netanyahu and a Mossad attempt to use a divorce involving the President of Yemen's family to penetrate the president's family's inner circle in a possible blackmail attempt.

Wikileaks's founder, Julian Assange, singled out Netanyahu for praise as a world leader who believes the embarrassing leaks will aid "global diplomacy." In an interview with Time magazine, Assange said "Netanyahu believes that the result of this publication, which makes the sentiments of many privately held beliefs public, are promising a pretty good . . . . [and] will lead to some kind of increase in the peace process in the Middle East and particularly in relation to Iran." Assange, who is believed to be in the United Kingdom, is the subject of an INTERPOL arrest warrant for alleged "sex crimes" in Sweden.

Huseyin Celik, the deputy chief of Turkey's governing Justice and Development Party (AKP), said that Israel appeared to have had advance knowledge of the contents of the latest release of State Department cables. Celik said of the leaks: "One should look at which country is content. Israel is extremely content."

Turkish Interior Minister Besir Atalay stated from Ankara that "It seems to us that the country which is not mentioned much, especially in the Middle East, or which this development seems to favor, is Israel. This is how we see it in a way when we look in the context of who is benefiting and who is being harmed."

WMR previously reported that Wikileaks, or "WikIsrael", was part of a Mossad operation having links within the neocon and Israel Lobby apparatus of the United States government. Turkey has reasons to be suspicious of the leaks. Various leaked State Department cables suggested that Iran was helping Hamas and secretly helping Iran with its nuclear program.

The notorious pro-Israeli publisher of The New Republic, Martin Peretz, chimed in with a column in his magazine stating that the leaks from the U.S. embassy in Ankara proved that Obama's outreach to the Turkish government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was a "failure."

In fact, many of the leaked cables favoring Israel, hostile to Russia and China, or proving very embarrassing to President Obama appear to have been written in total or in part or contain quotes by political appointee or career Jewish diplomats with close ties to Israel and its lobby in the United States: U.S. ambassadors to Turkey Eric Edelman and James Jeffrey; Deputy Secretary of State James B. Steinberg; U.S. ambassador to Brazil Clifford Sobel; U.S. charge d'affaires in Saudi Arabia Michael Gfoeller; Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Philip H. Gordon; ambassador-at-large Daniel Fried; U.S. ambassador to Canada David Jacobson; among others.

A source within the U.S. Secret Service, on deep background and on the condition of anonymity, informed WMR that while on a "business trip" to New York on November 8, Netanyahu visited a performing arts theater in West Greenwich Village. U.S. Secret Service personnel were required to accompany Netanyahu to the theater. The performance involved extreme sado-masochistic, as well as homosexual themes, according to our source, who added, "I almost threw up." Netanyahu was passing through New York on his way to New Orleans where he addressed the general assembly of the Jewish Federation of North America.

Another U.S. intelligence source has revealed to WMR that a well-known operative for the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) on Capitol Hill is attempting to blackmail the daughter of Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh in a "honey trap" operation. Saleh's daughter, who is recently divorced, has reportedly been writing checks to the AIPAC operative, which, subsequently, are not cashed. The un-cashed checks appear to be part of a Mossad operation designed to establish a paper trail that can later be used to blackmail Saleh through his daughter.

These are likely the first of many retaliatory moves by intelligence agencies around the world against Israel. As one informed source put it, "Israel overplayed its hand with these Wikileaks releases, now it will suffer the 'blowback.'"


MADSEN'S personal observation a few days ago:

This from an Italian journalist who has ane excellent point about Wikileaks (of course, no Italian paper got the same scoops as the NYT, [Gate] Guardian, LeMonde, or Spiegel):

"Another interesting issue to remark is the (non)role of the Italian journalists in the whole story. It is, at least, odd that a remote-located website news service, with no apparent connection with the country, is able to get sensitive information about the Italian government, while the local journalists - and especially those who write about politics - don't."


The following comment posted at is in response to Is Wikileaks a front for the CIA or Mossad? BY RICHARD SPENCER IN THE TELEGRAPH


“All bizarre and nonsensical conspiracy theory of course.”

It is not at all clear why you should say that. The “of course” only emphasizes the lack of analytical basis for your total dismissal.

Especially when one considers that in the end you yourself suggest a theme to the material.

“Ultimately, they put the onus on Middle Eastern countries to explain themselves. The cables are America’s own explanations. Neither Iran nor many of its Arab friends and enemies like being held to account overmuch.”

In our own lifetimes, we have learned of many dark operations more impressive than the selected release of some not-all-that-secret documents, many of them having release dates of not too many years in the future. The term “conspiracy theory” is now consistently used to disparage those who are genuinely puzzled about the official explanations of certain big events.

Yes, we have the paranoid extreme, but that extends into the mainstream too, even into politics.

In the end you must judge major news events by the standards of the late I.F. Stone. You must read different versions and explanations and make comparisons and weightings. You must judge the purport of the material itself, what it is intended to say or not say.

We live in a shadow world as never before in human history with vast intelligence establishments working day and night and a press now reduced to a small number of owners who have their own reasons for giving slants to affairs or even completely misrepresenting them.

Truth is perceived infrequently, but there are immensely well-financed establishments busy “getting out the story” and even creating it in some cases. To say otherwise is to admit to extreme naiveté or perhaps dishonesty.

When was the last time a paper like your Telegraph or even the New York Times did some serious investigative journalism for readers? Especially where the earth-shaking matters are concerned, rather than mother’s milk stuff like the abuse of parliamentary expenses. Almost never.

Where were you with Blair’s countless lies? Bush’s lies and absurdities? We lived through a set of events in which, after the greatest peace march in history, Blair managed to twist the truth and lie his way into doing something against the overwhelming sense of the British people. And the press pretty well let it happen.

We only have a few genuine investigative journalists in the world, and they include notably Seymour Hersh and Robert Fisk. But even their work must be subject to evaluation. They can have things planted on them, and they make mistakes.

The WikiLeaks material is undoubtedly authentic, but that does not at all exclude an underlying purpose in its release.

It is a well-known practice of intelligence agencies to give large bits of genuine material, none of it too compromising, in order to get either an important piece of intelligence in return or to “bury” some damaging deception like a fish hook planted in a minnow.

The CIA used to brag of having a huge house organ whose keys could be played to create the sense of a Bach fugue of seeming news. It was talking about all the publications, both compliant and duped, in which it could plant a story and have it reverberate ultimately as a convincing event.

I’m not sure whether WikiLeaks itself falls into the compliant or duped category, but the nature of the material, the main themes plus the many important things undoubtedly missing, say something important to those listening carefully.

I am completely underwhelmed by the content of the military WikiLeaks, both this time and previously.

Very little there that well-informed people did not already know. Yes, of course, the juicy tidbits about so-and-so said are fun, and so they are meant to be, but they are not all that informative.

I am sure there are countless lies and atrocities contained in the universe covered so far by WikiLeaks, but they are not in the material released.

The idea that no one knows where Assange is also strikes me as slightly ridiculous in this age of massive intelligence operations and the trampling of individual rights in the name of fighting terror.

If you think otherwise because of Osama bin Laden, you are rather late in learning he has been dead since the bombing of Tora Bora. The United States has kept him alive, as it were, for a focus in its insane War on Terror.

Cui bono?

The US looks like an innocent victim, just guilty of some unpleasant gossip here and there. Who wouldn’t know that? Israel gains support for an attack on Iran.

The leaks serve Israeli-Pentagon interests.

And do so in a convincing, seemingly disinterested way.

These leaks also serve America’s now cancerously-swollen intelligence apparatus in seeking more repression and secrecy within American society.

Your off-hand dismissal is unfair and unwarranted.



Wildfires and Wikileaks

Mazin Qumsiyeh, 4 December 2010



The whole world is talking about the Wikileaks leaking of previously classified US documents. Now I personally am skeptical about the selective leaking of documents that show only a tiny whiff of scandal for Israel. Most US foreign policy communication with world leaders and diplomats has been about protecting Israeli war crimes and strengthening Israeli positions. This is known to be true of both public communication and secret communications (e.g. already declassified material from the Truman era). So I would be excused to be skeptical when 300,000 documents are released and only few of them deal with Israel. Much of them deal with how various actors (especially western leaning Arab dictators) dutifully tell their masters in Washington (themselves beholden to the Israel-first lobbyists) that Iran is indeed the new Nazi Germany or the new Soviet Union.

There are really two possibilities here

1) That these “leaks” are a form of psy-ops engineered (selected) to benefit Israel’s plan of confronting Iran. See for example and–-more-israeli-game-theory-warfare/ and

2) That they are psy-ops that are calculated by the US and Israeli governments to do a small amount of exposure of sensitive material but a lot of confusion among public opinions in the world (in Europe and Arab countries) to change the focus from the disastrously failing policies in Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. (I saw such analysis in Arab media e.g. but little of it in Western progressive media).

Here is another analysis by Jonathan Cook: Wikileaks and the New Global Order

“At work here is a set of global forces that the US, in its hubris, believed it could tame and dominate in its own cynical interests. By the early 1990s that arrogance manifested itself in the claim of the “end of history”: the world’s problems were about to be solved by US-sponsored corporate capitalism. The new Wikileaks disclosures will help to dent those assumptions. If a small group of activists can embarrass the most powerful nation on earth, the world’s finite resources and its laws of nature promise a much harsher lesson.”

I disagree with many aspects of Fisk’s analysis below but it is witty and worth reading.

Now We Know. America Really Doesn’t Care about Injustice in the Middle East. By Robert Fisk
Political fires are raging and spin doctors in governments are trying hard to contain the fires and change the subject but the real solution for most of our problems remain obvious to most people: free Palestine – end apartheid.


John Pilger: Wikileaks and The War You Don’t See (December 3, 2010)
Award winning journalist John Pilger speaks on Australian radio about the absurdities put forward by members of the American government. He has a new documentary coming out in Britain on Dec. 12th called “The War You Don’t See” which features an interview with Julian Assange. To see the trailer, go to

John Pilger "The Invisible Government" (Sept 25, 2007)
The Propaganda Arm Of The Invisible Government



WikiLeaks founder threatens to release entire cache of unfiltered files

DOUG SAUNDERS - Dec. 05, 2010

At the centre of a tightening web of death threats, sex-crime accusations and high-level demands for a treason trial, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange threatened to unleash a "thermonuclear device" of completely unexpurgated government files if he is forced to appear before authorities.

Mr. Assange, the 39-year-old Australian Internet activist whose online document-leaking service has embarrassed the United States and other countries by publishing hundreds of thousands of secret diplomatic and military documents, has referred to the huge, unfiltered document as his "insurance policy."

The 1.3-gigabyte file, distributed through file-sharing services this summer and protected with an unbreakable 256-bit encryption key, contains full versions of all the U.S. documents received by WikiLeaks to date - including those that have been withheld from publication or have had names and details removed in order to protect the lives of spies, sources and soldiers.

Silent for the better part of a week as WikiLeaks made daily headlines around the globe, Mr. Assange has been increasingly vocal in recent days, defending his actions, decrying his critics and defying world leaders.

Mr. Assange's lawyer Mark Stephens warned that if Mr. Assange were to be brought to trial on rape accusations he faces in Sweden, or for treason charges that have been suggested by U.S. politicians, he would release the encryption key. The tens of thousands of people who have downloaded the file would instantly have access to the names, addresses and details contained in the file.

WikiLeaks, Mr. Stephens said, has "been subject to cyberattacks and censorship around the world and they need to protect themselves ... This is what they believe to be a thermonuclear device in the information age."

He uttered that threat as his client was believed to be in hiding in Britain, with prominent U.S. and Saudi officials calling for Mr. Assange's arrest or death, justice officials attempting to shut down his websites in many countries, and the Swedish justice system seeking him for questioning on the sexual-crime allegations.

Mr. Assange has denied the accusation, made by two women who hosted a party for him in Stockholm in August. He has acknowledged having had consensual sex with the complainants. Reports say the sex became non-consensual over disagreements about condom use.

This weekend he refused to respond to a European arrest warrant issued by Sweden, and an Interpol alert related to the accusation. His lawyers argued that the accusations amount to a smear campaign and suggested that U.S. officials might be behind them.

The Swedish prosecutor took the unusual step of going before the news media to say she has received no pressure or communication of any sort from international or political authorities and that the charges are unrelated to the leaks scandal.

"This investigation has proceeded perfectly normally without any political pressure of any kind," prosecutor Marianne Ny told the Agence France-Presse wire service. "It is completely independent."

A number of high-profile U.S. figures, including Republicans Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich, have called for the prosecution of Mr. Assange.

"Julian Assange is engaged in warfare," Mr. Gingrich said, echoing similar words spoken by Ms. Palin and others last week. "Information terrorism, which leads to people getting killed, is terrorism. And Julian Assange is engaged in terrorism. He should be treated as an enemy combatant and WikiLeaks should be closed down permanently and decisively."

However, U.S. charges against Mr. Assange are unlikely: He is not a U.S. citizen and, because he did not steal the documents himself, but only participated in their publication, he would likely be protected under the U.S. Constitution's free-speech provisions.

The documents were reportedly stolen from a U.S. military installation by Bradley Manning, a former private in the U.S. Army who copied years of secret Pentagon and State Department communiqués and passed them to Mr. Assange, who in turn brokered deals with worldwide media outlets to publish details from them. Those details, despite some censorship by Mr. Assange and the publishers, have shaken relations between the United States and Gulf countries, Russia, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Mr. Manning is already being held in solitary confinement, and will likely face treason and espionage charges. This has not stopped a growing chorus of U.S. and foreign figures from pushing for punishment for Mr. Assange.

U.S. newspapers reported that a team of Justice Department and Pentagon investigators is looking into the possibility of charges against Mr. Assange under the Espionage Act. Attorney-General Eric Holder said "this is not sabre-rattling" when asked by reporters about the possibility of charges. Justice officials in Australia, where Mr. Assange was born, are reportedly also looking into a prosecution.

That did not stop more figures from suggesting that Mr. Assange should be harmed or killed - a circle that includes Canadian Tom Flanagan, a former campaign manager to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who told a TV interviewer last week that Mr. Assange should be assassinated (he later apologized for the remark).

In an online interview with the Guardian newspaper, Mr. Assange said Mr. Flanagan "should be charged with incitement to commit murder."

He also told reporters Barack Obama and his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, should resign if they are shown to have authorized an operation to spy on United Nations top officials - one of the many secrets revealed in the leaked State Department cables.

"Obama must answer what he knew about this illegal order and when. If he refuses to answer or there is evidence he approved of these actions, he must resign," the WikiLeaks founder told the Spanish newspaper El Pais.

He suggested, not for the first time, that he believes his document service has had a profound effect on world history: "I believe geopolitics will be separated into pre- and post-Cablegate phases."

Check also:

A who's-who of the WikiLeaks allegations - 25 pictures and descriptive captions
Highlights of what the most recent WikiLeaks documents claim, and who's involved



Who, Precisely, Is Attacking the World?

by Paul Craig Roberts, December 01, 2010

The stuck pigs are squealing. To shift the onus from the U.S. State Department, Hillary Clinton paints WikiLeaks’ release of the “diplomatic cables” as an “attack on the international community.” To reveal truth is equivalent, in the eyes of the U.S. government, to an attack on the world.

It is WikiLeaks’ fault that all those U.S. diplomats wrote a quarter of a million undiplomatic messages about America’s allies, a.k.a. puppet states. It is also WikiLeaks’ fault that a member of the U.S. government could no longer stomach the cynical ways in which the U.S. government manipulates foreign governments to serve, not their own people, but American interests, and delivered the incriminating evidence to WikiLeaks.

The U.S. government actually thinks that it was WikiLeaks’ patriotic duty to return the evidence and to identify the leaker. After all, we mustn’t let the rest of the world find out what we are up to. They might stop believing our lies.

The influential German magazine Der Spiegel writes: “It is nothing short of a political meltdown for U.S. foreign policy.”

This might be more a hope than a reality. The “Soviet threat” during the second half of the 20th century enabled U.S. governments to create institutions that subordinated the interests of other countries to those of the U.S. government. After decades of following U.S. leadership, European “leaders” know no other way to act. Finding out that the boss badmouths and deceives them is unlikely to light a spirit of independence. At least not until America’s economic collapse becomes more noticeable.

The question is: how much will the press tell us about the documents? Spiegel itself has said that the magazine is permitting the U.S. government to censor, at least in part, what it prints about the leaked material. Most likely, this means the public will not learn the content of the 4,330 documents that “are so explosive that they are labeled ‘NOFORN,’” meaning that foreigners, including presidents, prime ministers, and security services that share information with the CIA are not permitted to read the documents. Possibly, also, the content of the 16,652 cables classified as “secret” will not be revealed to the public.

Most likely the press, considering their readers’ interests, will focus on gossip and the unflattering remarks Americans made about their foreign counterparts. It will be good for laughs. Also, the U.S. government will attempt to focus the media in ways that advance U.S. policies.

Indeed, it has already begun. On Nov. 29, National Public Radio emphasized that the cables showed that Iran was isolated even in the Muslim world, making it easier for the Israelis and Americans to attack. The leaked cables reveal that the president of Egypt, an American puppet, hates Iran, and the Saudi Arabian government has been long urging the U.S. government to attack Iran. In other words, Iran is so dangerous to the world that even its co-religionists want Iran wiped off the face of the earth.

NPR presented several nonobjective “Iranian experts” who denigrated Iran and its leadership and declared that the U.S. government, by resisting its Middle Eastern allies’ call for bombing Iran, was the moderate in the picture. The fact that President George W. Bush declared Iran to be a member of “the axis of evil” and threatened repeatedly to attack Iran and that President Obama has continued the threats – Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, has just reiterated that the U.S. hasn’t taken the attack option off the table – are not regarded by American “Iran experts” as indications of anything other than American moderation.

Somehow it did not come across the NPR newscast that it is not Iran but Israel that routinely slaughters civilians in Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank, and that it is not Iran but the U.S. and its NATO mercenaries who slaughter civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Pakistan.

Iran has not invaded any of its neighbors, but the Americans are invading countries halfway around the globe.

The “Iranian experts” treated the Saudi and Egyptian rulers’ hatred of Iran as a vindication of the U.S. and Israeli governments’ demonization of Iran. Not a single “Iranian expert” was capable of pointing out that the tyrants who rule Egypt and Saudi Arabia fear Iran because the Iranian government represents the interests of Muslims, and the Saudi and Egyptian governments represent the interests of the Americans.

Think what it must feel like to be a tyrant suppressing the aspirations of your own people in order to serve the hegemony of a foreign country, while a nearby Muslim government strives to protect its people’s independence from foreign hegemony.

Undoubtedly, the tyrants become very anxious. What if their oppressed subjects get ideas? Little wonder the Saudi and Egyptian rulers want the Americans to eliminate the independent-minded country that is a bad example for Egyptian and Saudi subjects.

As long as the dollar has enough value that it can be used to purchase foreign governments, information damaging to the U.S. government is unlikely to have much affect. As Alain of Lille said a long time ago, “Money is all.”


NOTE from Jean: Despite my initial misgivings about what looks to me like a sophisticated Psy-Op, several people nevertheless point out the fact that Wikileaks is providing an invaluable service through revealing the true face of our governments and I wish to reflect this viewpoint as well...

BUT BEFORE you get to review what I have from this other viewpoint, here is an excerpt from a LONG comment by David Wilcock - who believes this is part of a staged preparation to get full disclosure of ET presence and contacts underway (See WikiLeaks: new diplomatic cables contain UFO details, Julian Assange says):

China's October Surprise III: The Fight for Disclosure by David Wilcock (5 December 2010)
(...) My intuitive data has been very, very consistent in telling me the "negative elite" will not succeed. Any apparent victory they may expect to have is not part of the grander script this planet is being led through -- by high-level angelic beings, for lack of a better term.During the last three years I have had at least 200 different dreams all saying the Old World Order will be defeated in a very obvious and dramatic fashion. These dreams continue right up to the present and have not changed -- only gotten more intense.I have had many years of experience in how accurate this guidance can be, particularly when you get 'clusters' of data that all point in the same direction. The dreams have always said that Disclosure won't happen until we see a clear and spectacular defeat of the Powers that Were on the world stage first. The two must work in conjunction.This is exactly what's happening right now. Open your eyes and take a look at what you see.
IS WIKILEAKS NOTHING MORE THAN "CONTROLLED OPPOSITION? "Some reliable insider sources, like TBRNews, were trying to say Wikileaks was all 'controlled opposition' -- at least as of November 21st (emphasis added): Washington, D.C., November 21, 2010: “Although it is not a matter of public knowledge, the facts surrounding the so-called ‘WikiLeaks’ are such that perhaps a little publicity would do no harm. This concept is a government disinformation site, designed to ‘leak’ information to the public that cannot be published in the mainline media. The ‘tens of thousands of vital messages’ dealing with Afghanistan have been tailor-made to give Obama the excuse to exit from Afghanistan.Unfortunately, the Republican gains in the House have made this policy null and void. The new Republicans do not want to stop war, they want even more -- and so Obama’s plans to get out have been scrapped. The earlier WikiLeaks stories were all low-level, not important to U.S. national security and, aside from the Administration, of interest only to inane bloggers and their readers... The CIA loves to use people like Julian the Apostate because if they get caught, Langley always looks the other way and murmurs, ‘Julian who?’
WIKILEAKS IS THE BLOOD IN THE WATER The problem with this argument is that if you start a war, you can end up getting shot. If you start a wildfire, your house could burn down. If this is 'controlled opposition,' then whoever started it has absolutely nothing to lose by potentially disemboweling the entire national security state. These were the Drudge headlines from Monday, November 29th... and they did not sound good for the Powers that Were. It's a veritable orgy of 'bad news', as far as they are concerned -- the "most embarrassing, damaging disclosure in decades": Wikileaks is the blood in the water that turns ordinary people into hungry sharks when they're already pissed off about the economy. Many disgruntled insiders now have a democratic, unregulated way to create more leaks -- or make their own alternative wiki sites if they can't get through to Assange.If someone at the top did officially sanction Wikileaks, it's the political equivalent -- at least for the Powers that Were -- of playing a hot-potato game with nuclear fuel rods. The news system isn't even designed to be able to handle this much information at once. It typically grabs two or three stories in politics, entertainment, sports, business, comedy, local, et cetera and that's basically what you get. CLIP

AND HERE IS ALSO A REQUEST BY LONG-TIME ERN SUBSCRIBER ILYES ( WHO WOULD LIKE EVERYONE TO KEEP THIS SITUATION IN MIND DURING OUR MEDITATIONS TO HELP... "all the people of the world a/w/a JulianAssange and WikiLeaks, who DO understand what's going on and also need to be held in The Light, considering the indeed dangerous and most urgent conflict on our planet right now ... this is, for sure, the 'Armageddon battle' between the forces of Light and Dark, the ones (most esp the US) who insist their dominion of almost all of the world's govts MUST prevail, using their long-held and well-developed tool of Secrecy ... I've given up on PrezObama, he's simply another pawn who declines to muster any inner strength he might have behind his alleged convictions ... There's a critical battle now in progress between the US (SecrecyControlAll) Govt and ALL the people of the world who are determined to birth the New World which MUST manifest if we're to continue as a species, as a viable planet ... the battleground is WikiLeaks (ie, 'everywhere') ... I know there are many of us 'out here' who 'get' the importance of what's developing ... If one has doubts, one simply need take in the herculean efforts the US is making to silence WikiLeaks, reaching out and 'touching' all the sovereigns, for starters, and arm-twisting them to take certain steps -- eg: according to their lawyers, no Australian laws have been broken by Assange, yet there's an indication that Oz' govt has been told to cancel his passport; also note Pakistan's response below; was ordered to pull WikiLeaks' servers (which they'd been hosting), and amazon caved; even Pravda has criticized the US, mocking it for these ongoing violations of its 'free speech' veneer] ..."

Utterly surreal: Pravda justifiably criticising US for trying to stifle a free press... How times change!


Valerie Plame, YES! Wikileaks, NO!


In my recent article Ward Churchill: The Lie Lives On (Pravda.Ru, 11/29/2010), I discussed the following realities about America's legal "system": it is duplicitous and corrupt; it will go to any extremes to insulate from prosecution, and in many cases civil liability, persons whose crimes facilitate this duplicity and corruption; it has abdicated its responsibility to serve as a "check-and-balance" against the other two branches of government, and has instead been transformed into a weapon exploited by the wealthy, the corporations, and the politically connected to defend their criminality, conceal their corruption and promote their economic interests; and, finally, that the oft-quoted adage "Nobody is above the law" is a lie.

Some critics were quick to dismiss my article as politically motivated hyperbole. But with the recent revelations disclosed by Wikileaks, it appears that this article did not even scratch the surface, because it is now evident that Barack Obama, who entered the White House with optimistic messages of change and hope, is just as complicit in, and manipulative of, the legal "system's" duplicity and corruption as was his predecessor George W. Bush.

For example, as I stated in the aforementioned article, the Obama administration has refused to prosecute former Attorney General John Ashcroft for abusing the "material witness" statute; refused to prosecute Ashcroft's successor (and suspected perjurer) Alberto Gonzales for his role in the politically motivated firing of nine federal prosecutors; refused to prosecute Justice Department authors of the now infamous "torture memos," like John Yoo and Jay Bybee; and, more recently, refused to prosecute former CIA official Jose Rodriquez Jr. for destroying tapes that purportedly showed CIA agents torturing detainees.

Predictably, the official mantra supporting these refusals is that "exhaustive" investigations had been conducted. But now, thanks to Wikileaks, the world has been enlightened to the fact that the Obama administration not only refused to prosecute these individuals itself, it also exerted pressure on the governments of Germany and Spain not to prosecute, or even indict, any of the torturers or war criminals from the Bush dictatorship.

This revelation invariably leads to three inescapable conclusions: these so-called "exhaustive investigations" were a sham; the Obama administration never intended to prosecute such crimes and, in fact, went to inordinate lengths to cover them up; and the American government has the proven capacity to influence the legal systems of other countries.

And now, given the fact that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is facing criminal charges in Sweden, it is also evident that America even has the Swedish government and Interpol in its hip pocket.

Of course, I do not know if Assange committed the crime he is accused of. I do know that to the American legal "system" the truth is irrelevant. The minute Assange revealed the extent of America's criminality and cover-ups to the world, he became a marked man. And America is going to do anything it can to silence him.

Already we see the treacherous Joe Lieberman, the man who almost single-handedly killed the "public option" in the health care reform bill so insurance companies can continue to enjoy record profits, intimidate an American server into discontinuing its transmission of Wikileaks.

And we see many right-wing commentators demanding that Assange be hunted down, with some even calling for his murder, on the grounds that he may have endangered lives by releasing confidential government documents.

Yet, for the right-wing, this apparently was not a concern when the late columnist Robert Novak "outed" CIA agent Valerie Plame after her husband Joseph Wilson authored an OP-ED piece in The New York Times criticizing the motivations for waging war against Iraq. Even though there was evidence of involvement within the highest echelons of the Bush dictatorship, only one person, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was indicted and convicted of "outing" Plame to Novak. And, despite the fact that this "outing" potentially endangered the lives of Plame's overseas contacts, Bush commuted Libby's thirty-month prison sentence, calling it "excessive."

Why the disparity? The answer is simple: The Plame "outing" served the interests of the military-industrial complex and helped to conceal the Bush dictatorship's lies, tortures and war crimes, while Wikileaks not only exposed such evils, but also revealed how Obama's administration, and Obama himself, are little more than "snake oil" merchants pontificating about government accountability while undermining it at every turn.

Of course, I realize that analogizing the Plame case to Wikileaks is imperfect, and I certainly do not support the release of documents that could endanger any lives. But it should be remembered that threats to murder Assange are just as reprehensible. In addition, they may serve to dissuade future whistleblowers from raising legitimate concerns about government corruption and criminality.

And I should also note that while I avidly support the prosecution of those who lied, tortured and committed war crimes during the Bush dictatorship, I certainly do not, unlike some critics of Assange, advocate or support any violence against them, or against any human being, regardless of his or her politics.

Now there is talk of charging Assange under America's so-called "espionage" statutes. But American history has shown how these statutes have been incessantly used to conceal government criminality.

When the United States Constitution was being created, a conflict emerged between delegates who wanted a strong federal government (the Federalists) and those who wanted a weak federal government (the anti-Federalists).

Although the Federalists won the day, one of the most distinguished anti-Federalists, George Mason, refused to sign the new Constitution, sacrificing in the process, some historians say, a revered place amongst America's founding fathers.

Two of Mason's concerns were that the Constitution did not contain a Bill of Rights, and that the presidential pardon powers would allow corrupt presidents to pardon people who had committed crimes on presidential orders.

Mason's concerns about the abuse of the pardon powers were eventually proven right when Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon, when Ronald Reagan pardoned FBI agents convicted of authorizing illegal break-ins, and when George H.W. Bush pardoned six individuals involved in the Iran-Contra Affair.

Mason was also proven right after the Federalists realized that the States would not ratify the Constitution unless a Bill of Rights was added. But this was done begrudgingly, as demonstrated by America's second president, Federalist John Adams, who essentially destroyed the right to freedom of speech via the Alien and Sedition Acts, which made it a crime to say, write or publish anything critical of the United States government.

Years later, Adams' precedent would resurface during the presidency of Woodrow Wilson, this time via the Espionage and Sedition Acts. Although these laws were designed to prohibit criticism of America's involvement in World War One, mainstream religious leaders who criticized the war were rarely prosecuted, but persons and political organizations considered to be "radical," like Socialist leader Eugene Debs and members of the Industrial Workers of the World labor union (IWW), were imprisoned and their organizations decimated.

The McCarthy era of the 1950s brought forth the full power of the Smith Act, which was allegedly created to punish communists who advocated the violent overthrow of the United States government, but was ultimately used to blacklist and, in many cases, economically destroy members of the political left.

During the 1960s and 70s, after the courts diluted much of the power of the Sedition laws, government tactics used to "neutralize" persons and political organizations became more covert. Some, like actress Jean Seberg, had false rumors circulated about them in an attempt to destroy their careers. (Seberg ultimately committed suicide as a result of one of these rumors). Others, like Elmer "Geronimo" Pratt, were framed and imprisoned for crimes they did not commit. And still others, like Chicago Black Panther leaders Fred Hampton and Mark Clark, were murdered outright.

The ironic thing about these so-called "espionage" acts is that they actually invert the concepts of crime and punishment. Most criminals break laws that others have created, and people who assist in exposing or apprehending them are usually lauded as heroes. But with the "espionage" acts, the criminals themselves have actually created laws to conceal their crimes, and exploit these laws to penalize people who expose them.

The problem with America's system of government is that it has become too easy, and too convenient, to simply stamp "classified" on documents that reveal acts of government corruption, cover-up, mendacity and malfeasance, or to withhold them "in the interest of national security." Given this web of secrecy, is it any wonder why so many Americans are still skeptical about the "official" versions of the John F. Kennedy or Martin Luther King Jr. assassinations, or the events surrounding the attacks of September 11, 2001?

In the past, whenever I wrote about the evils of the Bush dictatorship, I often quoted a question folk singer Phil Ochs rhetorically asked during a 1968 concert in Vancouver, Canada: "What can you do when you're a helpless soul, a helpless piece of flesh, amid all this cruel, cruel machinery and terrible, heartless men?"

Ochs subsequently committed suicide in 1976, and while I am uncertain that this was the correct path to take, I can certainly understand his frustration. Although the election of Barack Obama gave rise to the "outrage" expressed by the so-called "tea party" movement, if there is any political group in America that has a right to be outraged, it is the Progressives. They bought into Obama's message of change and hope, believed that the criminals of the Bush dictatorship would have to answer for their crimes, and naively dreamed that America's respect for peace, justice and human rights would be restored.

But, as Wikileaks and the antics of Obama's "Justice" Department have shown, the Progressives were deceived. Yet, as in the past, they are forced to be supportive of Obama's duplicity because the alternative is worse.

I want to believe that the Wikileaks documents will change America for the better. But what undoubtedly will happen is a repetition of the past: those who expose government crimes and cover-ups will be prosecuted or branded as criminals; new laws will be passed to silence dissent; new Liebermans will arise to intimidate the corporate-controlled media; and new ways will be found to conceal the truth.

What Wikileaks has done is make people understand why so many Americans are politically apathetic and content to lose themselves in one or more of the addictions American culture offers, be it drugs, alcohol, the Internet, video games, celebrity gossip, text-messaging-in essence anything that serves to divert attention from the harshness of reality.

After all, the evils committed by those in power can be suffocating, and the sense of powerlessness that erupts from being aware of these evils can be paralyzing, especially when accentuated by the knowledge that government evildoers almost always get away with their crimes. The prevalence of such evils can shatter faith in goodness and sometimes even in God. They can transform virtues like honesty, compassion, and hope into vices and make those who cling to them suffer in poverty, depression and sorrow.

So shame on Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and all those who spew platitudes about integrity, justice and accountability while allowing war criminals and torturers to walk freely upon the earth. And shame on Germany and Spain, and all those other guilty countries, for allowing their sense of justice to be distorted by a nation that doesn't seem to know the meaning of the word.

And damn the right-wing outrage over the Wikileaks revelations. It is the American people who should be outraged that its government has transformed a nation with a reputation for freedom, justice, tolerance and respect for human rights into a backwater that revels in its criminality, cover-ups, injustices and hypocrisies.

So savor the Wikileaks documents while you can, because soon they'll be gone. And for the government criminals of the world, and for those who protect them, it will again be business as usual.

David R. Hoffman - Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru



"This article is spot on. As an American, I am appalled at the actions of my country and government regarding Wikileaks. As a citizen of the world, I am furious that other governments would cooperate in such a focused and obvious attempt to squash freedom of speech and the freedoms of the press, some of our most important values as Americans. I'm no fan of propaganda from any side of the fence. From a purely objective viewpoint, anyone who believes in the US Constitution, must be in support of Wikileaks, simply because the first amendment guarantees the right to free speech. I have heard the arguments about how this is comparable to the famous exception of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, but really this is not remotely the same thing. I am a citizen of the United States, and as such, I have a right to know what my government is doing in my name, and my government has a duty to inform me. We will no longer tolerate being lied to, or frightened over imaginary threats in order that we concede even more power into the hands of a corrupt government. These documents were leaked by an American, and as a soldier, PFC. Manningr is sworn to defend the Constitution of the US. I believe that he was doing exactly that when he decided that the world needed to see these documents."

"The Americans accuse gestapo and kgb of spying their own people - at the same time they spy every man alive on the planet!!they accuse nationalists of labour camps - in the meantime a god knows what happens in Guantanamo and all the other secret cia camps around the world. They accuse nationalist Germany and Ussr for no freedom of press, suppressed opinion and sh** like that - while they close down websites, they (most likely) accuse people (like Assange) with no evidence, they set ransom for people's head, they shoot and kill reporters and children,they use chemical and biological weapons,they used atomic bombs, they create guerrillas to overthrow governments and then they call them terrorists,etc..they try to transform the meaning of "global peace" so that anyone who doesn't shut up and do what America wants is branded a terrorist. I'm not suprised by Hillary. Reinhard Gehlen was the man they employed back in the old days to set up their spying network which works the same way today."


WikiLeaks news roundup

WikiLeaks now available at


Live Q&A with Julian Assange

Julian Assange: Why the world needs WikiLeaks

TIME's Julian Assange Interview: Full Transcript/Audio,8599,2034040-2,00.html
RS: How would you characterize your actions, both in this latest set of leaks as well as in the past? Would you say you're practicing civil disobedience against breaking the law in order to expose greater law-breaking? Is that the moral calculus that you use to justify the leaks?
JA: No, not at all. This organization practices civil obedience, that is, we are an organization that tries to make the world more civil and act against abusive organizations that are pushing it in the opposite direction. As for the law, we have now in our four-year history had over 100 legal attacks of various kinds and have been victorious in all of those matters. So if you want to talk about the law, it's very important to remember the law is not what, not simply what, powerful people would want others to believe it is. The law is not what a general says it is. The law is not what Hillary Clinton says it is. The law is not what a bank says it is. The law, rather, is what the Supreme Court in [the] land in the end says it is, and the Supreme Court in the case of the United States has an enviable Constitution on which to base its decisions. And that Constitution comes out of a revolutionary movement and has a Bill of Rights appraised by James Madison and others that includes a nuanced understanding for the balancing of power of [the] states in relation to the government. CLIP

NO SECRETS: Julian Assange’s mission for total transparency.
(...) Assange is an international trafficker, of sorts. He and his colleagues collect documents and imagery that governments and other institutions regard as confidential and publish them on a Web site called Since it went online, three and a half years ago, the site has published an extensive catalogue of secret material, ranging from the Standard Operating Procedures at Camp Delta, in Guantánamo Bay, and the “Climategate” e-mails from the University of East Anglia, in England, to the contents of Sarah Palin’s private Yahoo account. The catalogue is especially remarkable because WikiLeaks is not quite an organization; it is better described as a media insurgency. It has no paid staff, no copiers, no desks, no office. Assange does not even have a home. He travels from country to country, staying with supporters, or friends of friends—as he once put it to me, “I’m living in airports these days.” He is the operation’s prime mover, and it is fair to say that WikiLeaks exists wherever he does. At the same time, hundreds of volunteers from around the world help maintain the Web site’s complicated infrastructure; many participate in small ways, and between three and five people dedicate themselves to it full time. Key members are known only by initials—M, for instance—even deep within WikiLeaks, where communications are conducted by encrypted online chat services. The secretiveness stems from the belief that a populist intelligence operation with virtually no resources, designed to publicize information that powerful institutions do not want public, will have serious adversaries. CLIP

KEEP US STRONG - Help Wikileak keep governments open
WikiLeaks is a non-profit media organization dedicated to bringing important news and information to the public. We provide an innovative, secure and anonymous way for independent sources around the world to leak information to our journalists. We publish material of ethical, political and historical significance while keeping the identity of our sources anonymous, thus providing a universal way for the revealing of suppressed and censored injustices. WikiLeaks relies on its supporters in order to stay strong. Please keep us at the forefront of anti-censorship and support us today. You can also read more about WikiLeaks, our mission and objectives.

Library of Congress Is Latest Government Institution to Block Wikileaks
The Library of Congress has blocked access to the Wikileaks site on its staff computers and on the wireless network that visitors use, two sources tell TPM.The error message reportedly reads:Ad or Website blocked by LC DNSBH. Advertisements or websites that may be malicious are blocked.If this message appears in lieu of an advertisement (i.e., on part of the page), the advertisement site may be malicious. However the website is safe to use.If this message appears on a page by itself, the website is blocked due to potential malicious content. More information - LC IT Security - A spokesman for the library could not immediately comment, but expects to have a statement shortly. The library is a governmental institution and serves as the research arm for Congress. It was established in 1800 and, when it was burned down by the British in 1814, Thomas Jefferson donated his own personal library to replace it. (Not for free, though; Congress paid $23,950 for the books.) It has grown ever since and, according to the library, it has "more than 144 million items including more than 33 million cataloged books and other print materials in 460 languages; more than 63 million manuscripts; the largest rare book collection in North America; and the world's largest collection of legal materials, films, maps, sheet music and sound recordings."The State and Commerce departments have also reportedly told their employees not to look at the Wikileaks cables, while the Department of Education reportedly blocked it entirely. - CHECK ALSO U.S. Military in Iraq Tries to Intimidate Soldiers Into Not Reading Wikileaks

WikiLeaks cables condemn Russia as 'mafia state' (1 December 2010)
Kremlin relies on criminals and rewards them with political patronage, while top officials collect bribes 'like a personal taxation system'

Is Wikileaks Really the Enemy? (Nov 29, 2010)
Editor's Note: I am of the opinion that WikiLeaks mean well but they are not too careful with double checking the validity of their sources. Many of us believe that WikiLeaks are being used by AIPAC to further the agenda of the Industrial Military Complex by discrediting the foundations of the US Government, which will allow President Obama to rule by Executive Order in the new year...Robert LeJeune: As I watched Morning Joe with Joe Scarborough, I came to wonder exactly why it is we are starting to view Wikileaks as the enemy, and not the U.S Government itself! All you really have to do is scan over the cables and war logs, and the real enemy becomes clear! I find it very disturbing that Mr. Scarbourough can sit there and condemn a PFC and Wikileaks for releasing the information, yet does nothing to indicate the guilt of the United States Administration for the content of the release. When you step back and actually start to review the information in the cables and war logs, those whom are our leaders should be the ones under the gun. Once reviewed, we find that the current, and prior administration, are the ones whom have continued to lie to the American people and the world, as to their actions in these illegal wars. We find that there have been over 100 thousand civilian deaths in the ongoing wars, not the 20 or 30 thousand we were told in press releases and statements given by both administrations. Without the PFC and Wikileaks, it may have been decades before the American people were told the truth as to what was done in their name, if we would have ever been told the truth at all! I just wonder the actual number of civilian deaths in Viet Nam, in light of the fact that our government has demonstrated a willingness to openly lie to us. CLIP

Don’t Abandon Julian Assange Now by Steve Beckow (Dec 5, 2010)
The latest attack on Julian Assange has come from lightworker Jane Burgermeister. (1) Numerous attacks are coming from various quarters, many of them lightworkers.The current attack suggests that the Economist gave Assange an award in 2008 and the Economist is owned by the Rothschilds. It also suggests that Amnesty International gave Assange an award and AI is alleged to have a connection to the UN and IMF. (...) The effect of Julian’s and Wikileaks’ disclosure is to make it more difficult for an illegal war to be waged in Afghanistan and Iraq. The effect of the lightworker suggestions that Julian is a tool of the cabal is to nullify the impact of that disclosure.You have to decide whether you’re going to abandon Julian now and watch the cabal survive the frontal assault that Julian’s efforts represent or take the risk of possibly making a bad decision but have the full impact of Wikileaks’ disclosure stand.Never mind the personalities involved. The Wikileaks disclosure is our best shot at tying the cabal in knots. Abandon Julian Assange now and we will lose that tool in our toolbox. (...) Don’t let it play upon your desire to be honest and moral by feeding you information that makes it seem as if Julian is compromised – sex scandals, awards received, connections, whatever. Even if they are true, which I don’t think they are, the time to deal with that will be later. Now is the time to stand firm. CLIP

U.N. Special Rapporteur Juan Méndez: Instead of Focusing on Assange, U.S. Should Address WikiLeaks’ Disclosures of Torture (December 02, 2010)
One of the leaked U.S. State Department cables released by WikiLeaks urges diplomats to gather intelligence about "plans and intentions of member states or UN Special Rapporteurs to press for resolutions or investigations into US counterterrorism strategies and treatment of detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan or Guantanamo." We speak to Juan Méndez, the new U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. He has called on the United States to investigate and prosecute torture committed under former President George W. Bush. He also said he hopes to visit Iraq and Guantánamo Bay to probe widespread torture allegations. Méndez says, "We seem to be focusing on whether disclosing these cables ... merits some kinds of action against Julian Assange... I’m very concerned about the documents that show that literally thousands of people were first imprisoned by American forces and then transferred to the control of forces in Iraq and perhaps even in Afghanistan, where they knew that these people were going to be tortured."

Is WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange a Hero? Glenn Greenwald Debates Steven Aftergood of Secrecy News (December 03, 2010)
WikiLeaks is coming under attack from all sides. The U.S. government and embassies around the world are criticizing the whistleblowing group for releasing a massive trove of secret State Department cables. The WikiLeaks website is struggling to stay online just days after Amazon pulled the site from its servers following political pressure. The U.S. State Department has blocked all its employees from accessing the site and is warning all government employees not to read the cables, even at home. "These attacks will not stop our mission, but should be setting off alarm bells about the rule of law in the United States," said WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. We host a debate between Steven Aftergood, a transparency advocate who has become a leading critic of WikiLeaks, and Glenn Greenwald, a constitutional law attorney and legal blogger for

L'hébergement de WikiLeaks en France menacé (03.12.10)
Eric Besson et les services de l'Etat peuvent-ils faire interdire l'hébergement de WikiLeaks par la société roubaisienne OVH ? "C'est au juge d'en décider", répond en substance Octave Klaba, fondateur d'OVH, dans un message sur le forum de sa société. Il annonce également qu'OVH va saisir le juge des référés "afin qu'il se prononce sur la légalité ou pas de ce site sur le territoire français (...) compte tenu de pressions qui commencent réellement à se faire sentir, même à Roubaix Valley". (...) OVH n'héberge pas la totalité des serveurs de WikiLeaks. D'après ZDNet, ces derniers se partageraient entre la France, la Suède et les Etats-Unis. Plus précisément, la société suédoise Bahnhof a confirmé à ZDNet qu'elle hébergeait deux serveurs de WikiLeaks. "Nous leur fournissons uniquement des ressources et n'avons aucun contrôle sur leur contenu ou la façon dont ils gèrent leur trafic", a précisé la porte-parole de l'hébergeur. Toujours selon le site spécialisé, Bahnhof héberge la page, qui contient la vidéo d'un hélicoptère de l'armée américaine tirant sur des civils irakiens.OVH héberge, quant à lui, les pages et, qui contient les fameux câbles diplomatiques. Les pages des War Logs (carnets de guerre) d'Irak et d'Afghanistan seraient hébergées aux Etats-Unis par le Massachusetts Institute of Technology, selon ZDNet, qui n'a pas encore pu avoir confirmation officielle de la part de celui-ci. Les pages en question sont actuellement sous le coup d'une cyber-attaque. En parallèle, des groupes d'internautes à travers le monde se sont mobilisés pour héberger sur leurs propres serveurs des "sites-miroirs" de WikiLeaks, c'est-à-dire la copie exacte du site original. Plusieurs de ces initiatives proviennent de France, comme pour le miroir CLIP



Live with the WikiLeakable world or shut down the net. It's your choice

Western political elites obfuscate, lie and bluster – and when the veil of secrecy is lifted, they try to kill the messenger

John Naughton - 6 December 201

'Never waste a good crisis" used to be the catchphrase of the Obama team in the runup to the presidential election. In that spirit, let us see what we can learn from official reactions to the WikiLeaks revelations.

The most obvious lesson is that it 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.

And as the backlash unfolds – first with deniable attacks on internet service providers hosting WikiLeaks, later with companies like Amazon and eBay and PayPal suddenly "discovering" that their terms and conditions preclude them from offering services to WikiLeaks, and then with the US government attempting to intimidate Columbia students posting updates about WikiLeaks on Facebook – the intolerance of the old order is emerging from the rosy mist in which it has hitherto been obscured. The response has been vicious, co-ordinated and potentially comprehensive, and it contains hard lessons for everyone who cares about democracy and about the future of the net.

There is a delicious irony in the fact that it is now the so-called liberal democracies that are clamouring to shut WikiLeaks down.

Consider, for instance, how the views of the US administration have changed in just a year. On 21 January, secretary of state Hillary Clinton made a landmark speech about internet freedom, in Washington DC, which many people welcomed and most interpreted as a rebuke to China for its alleged cyberattack on Google. "Information has never been so free," declared Clinton. "Even in authoritarian countries, information networks are helping people discover new facts and making governments more accountable."

She went on to relate how, during his visit to China in November 2009, Barack Obama had "defended the right of people to freely access information, and said that the more freely information flows the stronger societies become. He spoke about how access to information helps citizens to hold their governments accountable, generates new ideas, and encourages creativity." Given what we now know, that Clinton speech reads like a satirical masterpiece.

One thing that might explain the official hysteria about the revelations is the way they expose how political elites in western democracies have been deceiving their electorates.

The leaks make it abundantly clear not just that the US-Anglo-European adventure in Afghanistan is doomed but, more important, that the American, British and other Nato governments privately admit that too.

The problem is that they cannot face their electorates – who also happen to be the taxpayers funding this folly – and tell them this. The leaked dispatches from the US ambassador to Afghanistan provide vivid confirmation that the Karzai regime is as corrupt and incompetent as the South Vietnamese regime in Saigon was when the US was propping it up in the 1970s. And they also make it clear that the US is as much a captive of that regime as it was in Vietnam.

The WikiLeaks revelations expose the extent to which the US and its allies see no real prospect of turning Afghanistan into a viable state, let alone a functioning democracy. They show that there is no light at the end of this tunnel. But the political establishments in Washington, London and Brussels cannot bring themselves to admit this.

Afghanistan is, in that sense, a quagmire in the same way that Vietnam was. The only differences are that the war is now being fought by non-conscripted troops and we are not carpet-bombing civilians.

The attack of WikiLeaks also ought to be a wake-up call for anyone who has rosy fantasies about whose side cloud computing providers are on. These are firms like Google, Flickr, Facebook, Myspace and Amazon which host your blog or store your data on their servers somewhere on the internet, or which enable you to rent "virtual" computers – again located somewhere on the net. The terms and conditions under which they provide both "free" and paid-for services will always give them grounds for dropping your content if they deem it in their interests to do so. The moral is that you should not put your faith in cloud computing – one day it will rain on your parade.

Look at the case of Amazon, which dropped WikiLeaks from its Elastic Compute Cloud the moment the going got rough. It seems that Joe Lieberman, a US senator who suffers from a terminal case of hubris, harassed the company over the matter. Later Lieberman declared grandly that he would be "asking Amazon about the extent of its relationship with WikiLeaks and what it and other web service providers will do in the future to ensure that their services are not used to distribute stolen, classified information". This led the New Yorker's Amy Davidson to ask whether "Lieberman feels that he, or any senator, can call in the company running the New Yorker's printing presses when we are preparing a story that includes leaked classified material, and tell it to stop us".

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.

As Simon Jenkins put it recently in the Guardian, "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. Over to them.



Net neutrality, the FCC, Wikileaks and the future of internet freedom

(NaturalNews) Regardless of what you think about the Wikileaks release of state secrets, there's no debating the astonishing fact that the internet made these leaks possible. Without the internet, no single organization such as Wikileaks would have been able to so widely propagate secret government information and make it public. In the old model of information distribution -- centralized mainstream media newspapers and news broadcasts -- such information would have been tightly controlled thanks to government pressure.

But the Internet allows individual information publishers to bypass the censorship of government. In the case of Wikileaks, it allowed an Australian citizen to embarrass the U.S. government while sitting at a laptop computer in the United Kingdom.

Governments don't like to be embarrassed. They don't like their secrets aired on the Internet. Sure, it's okay for governments to tap all ofyour secrets by monitoring your phone calls, emails and web browsing habits, but every government seeks to protect its own secrets at practically any cost. That's why the upshot of this Wikileaks release may be that governments will now start to look for new ways to censor and control the internet in order to prevent such information leaks from happening in the future.

What governments around the world are suddenly beginning to realize is thata free internet is ultimately incompatible with government secrets, and secrets are essential to any government that wants to remain in power. That's because, as even Noam Chomsky stated in this DemocracyNow video interview (, most government secrets are based on information governments wouldn't want their people to discover -- secrets that might threaten the legitimacy of government if the people found out the truth.

How the FCC plans to seize authority over the internet

As part of a long-term plan to control content on the internet, the FCC is now attempting to assert authority over the internet in the same way it has long exercised content censorship authority over broadcast television and radio.

The reason you can't say those seven dirty words on broadcast television, in other words, is because the FCC controls broadcast television content and can simply revoke the broadcast licenses of any television station that refuses to comply. This is the same tactic, in the internet world, of yanking a web site's domain name, which the Department of Homeland Security has already begun doing over the last several weeks (

The FCC also controls content on the radio and can yank the broadcast licenses of any radio stations that refuse to comply with its content censorship. This is why operators of "pirate radio stations" are dealt with so harshly: For the government to allow any radio station to operate outside its censorship and control is to invite dissent.

The internet, of course, has been operating freely and without any real government censorship for roughly two decades. In that time, it has grown to be what is arguably the most influential medium in the world for information distribution. Most importantly, the internet is the medium of information freedom that is not controlled by any government.

The U.S. government wants to change all that, and they've dispatched the FCC to reign in the "freedoms" of the internet.

How to crush internet Free Speech

The first step to the FCC's crushing of internet freedom is to assert authority over the internet by claiming to run the show. The FCC, of course, has no legal authority over the internet. It was only granted authority in 1934 over broadcast communications in the electromagnetic spectrum -- you know, radio waves and antennas, that kind of thing.

There is nothing in the Communications Act of 1934 that grants the FCC any authority over the internet because obviously the internet didn't exist then, and it would have been impossible for lawmakers in the 1930's to imagine the internet as it operates today.

So instead of following the law, the FCC is trying to "fake" its way into false authority over the internet by claiming authority in the current "net neutrality" debate. By asserting its authority with net neutrality, the FCC will establish a beachhead of implied authority from which it can begin to control and censor the internet.

This is why "net neutrality" is a threat to internet freedom. It's not because of anything to do with net neutrality itself, but rather with the FCC's big power grab in its assertion that it has authority over websites just like it has authority over broadcast radio.

The FCC may soon tell you what you can post on the internet

Where is this all heading? Once the FCC establishes a foothold on the 'net, it can then assert that it has the power to tell you what to post on the internet. Here's how it might unfold:

First, the FCC will simply ban what it calls "information traitors," which will include people like Julian Assange (Wikileaks) who publish state secrets. (Technically Julian Assange can't be a traitor since he's not even American in the first place, but don't expect the FCC to care about this distinction.)

Once the public is comfortable with that, the FCC will advance its agenda to include "information terrorists" which will include anything posted about Ron Paul, the federal reserve and the counterfeit money supply, G. Edward Griffin, or anything from true U.S. patriots who defend the Constitution. The anti-state website (where some of my own articles have appeared from time to time) would also be immediately banned because its information is so dangerous to government control.

After that censorship is in place, the FCC will likely begin to push the corporate agenda by banning websites that harm the profits of large corporations. This will include, of course, websites like which teach people about health freedom, nutritional cures, natural remedies and alternatives to Big Pharma's high-profit pharmaceuticals.

The way this will come about is that the FCC may require a license to publish health information on the web, in much the same way that states currently license doctors to practice medicine. This is how conventional medicine has operated its monopoly for so long, by the way: By controlling the licensing of doctors at the state level. Any doctor who dares prescribe nutritional supplements or suggest that medication might be harmful to a patient immediately gets stripped of his license to practice medicine (and thereby put out of business). The FCC will likely do the same thing across the internet. Sites that publish health information without a license will be deemed "a threat to public health" and be seized by the government.

The first target? Anti-vaccine websites. Vaccines are so crucial to the continuation of disease and medical enslavement in America that any site questioning the current vaccine mythology will be deemed a threat to public health -- or perhaps even a "terrorism" organization.

Essentially, once the FCC has gained power and authority over the internet, it will use that power to push a Big Government / Big Business agenda that censors the truth, keeps people trapped in a system of disinformation, and silences anyone who challenges the status quo.

The FCC is poised to become the FDA of internet information, banning alternative speech and enforcing an information monopoly engineered by powerful corporations.

Think of the FCC as the new the Ministry of Truth from George Orwell's novel 1984 (

This is not about net neutrality, it's about the FCC power grab

Remember, I am not arguing here for or against the principle of net neutrality itself, but rather warning about the FCC's imposition of false authority over the internet in the first place. The idea of net neutrality has merits, but granting the FCC the power to control the internet is a disastrously bad idea that will only end in censorship and "information tyranny" -- especially now that governments around the world are witnessing the "dangers" of information freedom via the Wikileaks fiasco.

If there's one thing governments hate, it's real freedom. Sure, they all talk about freedom and publicly claim their allegiance to it, but behind the scenes what they really want is total information control. That's because freedom gives people the ability to say what they want, to whomever they want, and even to oppose the doctrine of the government.

Just look at China and how it has censored the internet to the point where you can't even log in to Facebook from that country.

Governments hate freedom because freedom threatens centralized power and control over the People. And because governments hate freedom, they also hate the internet as long as it's free. This is why bloggers and internet journalists are right now imprisoned all over the world for merely posting the truth (

As Noam Chomsky said in his DemocracyNow interview (link above), what the recent Wikileaks releases really show is that the U.S. government has "a profound hatred for democracy."

It also happens to have a profound hatred for actual freedom, because people who are free to think for themselves and write whatever they want are always going to be a threat to a government that wants people to conform, obey and acquiesce.

All government agencies seek to expand their power
What do the FCC, FDA, TSA, DEA, FTC and USDA all have in common?

They all want more power. They want more authority, bigger budgets and more control over the world around them. They are like cancer tumors, growing in size and toxicity while they consume more and more by stealing resources from a healthy host. The bigger these cancer tumors become, the more dangerous they become to the health of the host body, and the more urgently they need to be held in check or excised from the body entirely.

There is no such thing as a government agency that wants to be smaller, with shrinking budgets and fewer employees on the taxpayer payroll. Government departments -- just like people -- incessantly seek more power even at the expense of freedom among those they claim to serve. And this move by the FCC to assume control over the internet is one of the most dangerous power grabs yet witnessed in the short history of the information age.



If you are not yet a subcriber to the Earth Rainbow Network emailing list and would like to subscribe to its automated listserver and regularly receive similar compilations covering a broad range of subjects, including each new Meditation Focus issued on a regular basis, simply send a blank email at from the email account to which you want to receive the material compiled and networked by the Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator. Subscription is FREE!