Is the End Game of Wikileaks Internet Censorship?

F. William Engdahl’s first book, A
Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order, discussed
the roles of Zbigniew Brzezinski and George Ball and of the USA in the 1979
overthrow of the Shah of Iran. Engdahl claims that Brzezinski and Ball used the
Islamic Balkanization model proposed by Bernard Lewis to accomplish US policy
goals in Iran. Not coincidentally, Brzezinski was a key figure in US
President Barack Obama’s 2008 election campaign and played a key role in helping
former US President Jimmy Carter get elected. In 2007, he released a book  that exposed the massive dangers of GMO
foods called, Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of GMO.

One of F. William Engdahl’s latest
articles is titled “Wikileaks, a Big Dangerous US Government Con Job”. In this
article, Engdahl implies that Wikileaks is
a US government-run propaganda and disinformation operation with an end goal of restricting
freedoms on the internet. Here are some of the key excerpts from this article.

"A closer look at the details of what has
so far been carefully leaked by the most ultra-establishment of international
media such as the New York Times reveals a clear agenda. That agenda coincidentally
serves to buttress the agenda of US geopolitics around the world from Iran to
North Korea.

It is almost too perfectly scripted to be true. A discontented 22-year old US Army
soldier on duty in Baghdad, Bradley Manning, a low-grade US Army intelligence
analyst, described as a loner, a gay in the military, a disgruntled “computer
geek,” sifts through classified information at Forward Operating
Base Hammer. He decides to secretly download US State Department email
communications from the entire world over a period of eight months for hours a
day, onto his blank CDs while pretending to be listening to Lady Gaga. In
addition to diplomatic cables, Manning is believed to have provided WikiLeaks with helicopter gun camera
video of an errant US attack in Baghdad on unarmed journalists, and with war
logs from Iraq and Afghanistan. It is almost too perfectly scripted to be true.
A discontented 22-year old US Army soldier on duty in Baghdad, Bradley Manning,
a low-grade US Army intelligence analyst, described as a loner, a gay in the
military, a disgruntled “computer geek,” sifts through classified information
at Forward Operating
Base Hammer. He decides to secretly download US State Department email
communications from the entire world over a period of eight months for hours a
day, onto his blank CDs while pretending to be listening to Lady Gaga. In
addition to diplomatic cables, Manning is believed to have provided WikiLeaks with helicopter gun camera
video of an errant US attack in Baghdad on unarmed journalists, and with war
logs from Iraq and Afghanistan.”

"Manning
then is supposed to have tracked down a notorious former US computer hacker to
get his 250,000 pages of classified US State Department cables out in the
Internet for the whole world to see. He allegedly told the US hacker that the
documents he had contained "incredible, awful things that belonged in the
public domain and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington,
DC." The hacker turned him in to US authorities so the story goes. Manning
is now incommunicado since months in US military confinement so we cannot ask
him, conveniently. The Pentagon routinely hires the best hackers to design
their security systems.

[Assange]
selects
as exclusive newspapers to decide what is to be leaked the New York Times which did such service in promoting faked propaganda
against Saddam that led to the Iraqi war, the London Guardian and Der Spiegel.
Assange claims he had no time to sift through so many pages so handed them to
the trusted editors of the establishment media for them to decide what should
be released. Very “anti-establishment” that.

The New York Times even assigned one of its
top people, David E. Sanger, to control the release of the Wikileaks material.
Sanger is no establishment outsider. He sits as a member of the elite Council on Foreign
Relations as well as the Aspen Institute Strategy
Group together with the likes of Condi Rice, former Defense Secretary
William Perry, former CIA head John Deutch, former State Department Deputy
Secretary and now World Bank head Robert Zoellick among
others. Indeed a strange choice of media for a person who claims to be
anti-establishment. But then Assange also says he believes the US Government
version of 9/11 and calls the Bilderberg Group a
normal meeting of people, a very establishment view.

Most important, the 250,000
cables are not "top secret" as we might have thought. Between two and
three million US Government employees are cleared to see this level of
"secret" document, [1] and some
500,000 people around the world have access to the Secret Internet Protocol
Router Network (SIPRnet) where the cables were stored. SIPRnet is not
recommended for distribution of top-secret information. Only 6% or 15,000 pages
of the documents have been classified as even secret, a level below top-secret.
Another 40% were the lowest level, "confidential", while the rest
were unclassified. In brief, it was not all that secret.

What
is emerging from all the sound and Wikileaks
fury in Washington is that the entire scandal is serving to advance a
long-standing Obama and Bush agenda of policing the until-now free Internet.
Already the US Government has shut the Wikileaks
server in the United States though no identifiable US law has been broken."

"The process
of policing the Web was well underway before the current leaks scandal. In 2009
Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller and Republican Olympia Snowe introduced the Cybersecurity
Act of 2009 (S.773). It would give the President unlimited power to
disconnect private-sector computers from the internet. The bill "would
allow the president to ’declare a cyber-security emergency’ relating to
’non-governmental’ computer networks and do what’s necessary to respond to the
threat." We can expect that now this controversial piece of legislation
will get top priority when a new Republican House and the Senate convene in
January.

US Department of Homeland Security, an agency
created in the political hysteria following 9/11 2001 that has been compared to
the Gestapo, has already begun policing the Internet. They are quietly seizing
and shutting down internet websites (web domains) without due process or a
proper trial. DHS simply seizes web domains that it wants to and posts an
ominous "Department of Justice" logo on the web site. See an example
at http://torrent-finder.com (My note: Do click on this link. It's worth checking out.)"

On the
political front, I agree with Engdahl’s assessment of Assange’s leaked
government cables. In the cables I have seen discussed in various newspaper articles thus far, there is nothing more than the occasional embarrassing
quote, nothing top-secret, and nothing remotely damaging to any US allies
revealed in any of these supposedly top-secret government cables.

And regarding Assange’s threat of leaking thousands of confidential documents
contained in a 5 gigabyte drive regarding a big US bank believed to be Bank of
America as an “anti-establishment” act, I’m not buying it. According to a Forbes
interview, Assange stated that his leak would “give a true and representative
insight into how banks behave at the executive level in a way that will
stimulate investigations and reforms, I presume.” I say, so what if this big leak
Assange is in possession of pertains to Bank of America and if it reveals
documents that result in the demise of BofA? If this is how this drama plays
out, this event would ultimately be more pro-establishment and pro-elite than anti-establishment. The
demise of BofA would only mean that JP Morgan, as they have already done with
Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual, would have yet another opportunity to stamp
out their competition, swoop in like vultures, and pick up BofA’s carcass for
pennies on the dollar. Or perhaps Goldman Sachs will be given this carcass to
pick clean.  Either way, if this
happens, it consolidates power for the elites at the top and could not have worked
out any better if Assange was a paid employee of Goldman Sachs or JP Morgan. Remember
that BofA bought up Merrill Lynch when Merrill Lynch failed, so an acquisition of BofA would translate
into a delayed acquisition of Merrill Lynch.

In
the book, “The Great Depression of the XXI Century,” Tanya Cariina Hsu wrote:

“In
1907, J.P. Morgan, a private New York banker, published a rumor that a
competing unnamed large bank was about to fail. It was a false charge but
customers nonetheless raced to their banks to withdraw their money, in case it
was their bank. As they pulled out their funds, the banks lost their cash
deposits and were forced to call in their loans. People therefore had to pay
back their mortgages to fill the banks with income, going bankrupt in the
process. The 1907 panic resulted in a crash that prompted the creation of the
Federal Reserve, a private banking cartel with the veneer of an independent
government organization. Effectively, it was a coup by elite bankers in order
to control the industry."

"When
signed into law in 1913, the Federal Reserve would loan and supply the nation’s
money, but with interest. The more money it was able to print, the more
"income" it generated for itself. By its very nature, the Federal
Reserve would forever keep producing debt to stay alive. It was able to print
America’s monetary supply at will, regulating its value. To control valuation,
however, inflation had to be kept in check.

The
Federal Reserve then doubled America’s money supply within five years, and in
1920, it called in a mass percentage of loans. Over five thousand banks
collapsed overnight. One year later, the Federal Reserve again increased the
money supply by 62 percent, but in 1929, it again called the loans back in, en
masse. This time, the crash of 1929 caused over sixteen thousand banks to fail
and an 89 percent plunge on the stock market. The private and well-protected
banks within the Federal Reserve system were able to snap up the failed banks
at pennies on the dollar."

If this
sounds familiar, it should.  This
seems to be the blueprint by today's banking elites for today’s banking industry as well. During the Bank Panic of 1907 and the Great Depression,
JP Morgan was one of the biggest beneficiaries of a panic that many
historians claimed they, along with the Federal Reserve, helped to manufacture (JP Morgan is alleged to have helped engineer both the Panic of
1907 and the Great Depression while the Federal Reserve helped engineer
the Great Depression). If the future scenario
regarding Wikileaks's release of incriminating big bank documents plays out anywhere close to the one I presented above, Julian Assange would, in essence, be performing a massive favor for the most favored private banks
of the Federal Reserve system. One must remember that during this manufactured global monetary crisis, not all banks are created equal and a handful of banks are hand picked for survival and prosperity at the expense of hundreds of others. Just because Wikileaks threatens to release incriminating documents on a big bank that could make it look bad, this should not be naively or blindly interpreted as an anti-establishment act.

Admittedly, like millions of others, I was fooled by Wikileaks's intent in the beginning. But the more and more I research them, the more it seems as though Wikileaks is cooperating with governments and banks rather than serving as their adversary or as their watchdog to increase transparency. Now, if Mr.
Assange releases cables that expose detailed correspondences between the US
Federal Reserve and JP Morgan regarding silver price suppression schemes or how
Goldman Sachs deliberately releases misinformation about gold prices, or if he
releases diplomatic cables exposing secrets between the US and Israel that have
been concealed from the public, I might start once again believing that the goal of Wikileaks is to provide greater transparency
about government and banker actions. One thing I have learned over the years about the shadowy world of banking and politics is that if something appears to be a great coincidence, it usually is not, and that things rarely are what they seem to be on the surface.

About the author: SmartKnowledgeU is a fiercely independent investment research & consulting firm dedicated to helping Main Street avoid the fraud of Wall Street.

Comments

[Cognitive Dissonance]

You do not understand what my comment means.

[Goldilocks]

How long & how often someone posts @ ZH is irrelevant.

[grl]

macfly, I'm sorry but I didn't detect any cogent argument there. Yes, I have beliefs and I call them that...not truth. I have read many of the 9/11truth sites (including one you posted above). It is not that I don't know the premises of conspiracy theories...my point is they are beliefs...not truth! As with those who want to get into an argument about whether their religious beliefs are the truth, so too I say to you, admit that the CTs are beliefs, not truth and we are in agreement. 

[Seer]

Conspiracy: the act of two or more people collaborating with the intent to deceive

Theory: a set of statements or principles intended to describe a particular set of facts or phenomena

Before the following were made public anyone suggesting their existence would have been labeled, accordning to you, a conspiracy theorist:

Manhattan Project (actual concluded project)

Operation Northwoods (attempted, "official" [Executive?] documentation released)

(I believe that someone else posted a larger list)

Regarding 9/11, one has to ask why gravity is not being allowed as evidence into the govt's fact-finding arena: I believe that the "offical" conspiracy theory pushed forward, the "pancake theory," was basically ditched because it failed in the face of scrutiny (tested against the FACT of gravity).

Thanks for playing!

[downrodeo]

fact: building 7 was not hit by a plane

fact: building 7 fell at (or nearly at) free fall speed

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/speed.html

So what does this lead you to believe is true? HAHAHAHAHA.

It ok. You BELIEVE the government story (unlike the 9/11 commissioners, of course), and that makes it TRUE, in your mind. I love how the word lie is embedded in believe, language is more powerful than we realize, and ten times as mysterious.

In reality, we each individually make the assumption that we've got it figured our or we're onto it. The truth is, we don't, and we're damn scared about it. We let our reptile brains cling to whatever order and uniformity they can see (or think they can) amidst the chaos, and we pretend for the moment that we won't ever die. Complexity reigns supreme. http://halfpasthuman.com/horrors.html

[macfly]

You spent less than 8 minutes on two sites whose principal content is held in several in depth 60 minute and longer pieces, and you come back here with a statement like that?

There can be no meaningful debate if you do not understand what it is you are debating, and by illustrating your the inability to absorb and process information you do not agree with. It is clear to see that you are stuck in your own belief system, the very thing you castigate others for above.

As Jung noted, we most often dislike in others the thing we most dislike in ourselves.

[MagicHandPuppet]

A theory (aka contemplation or speculation) is not a "belief".  A probability is not an absolute.  And a fact is not a theory.  It is hard to know the facts and it is not easy to determine the legitimacy of sources of facts.  But, one can make judgements on the facts and their sources, do your own due diligence, and apply rational thinking to determine a world view based on most probable facts holding the position that your outlook may change when new information becomes available.

Conversely, you can simply brush away every other possibility that conflicts with what your mommy told you as "conspiracy theory"... Thus you can simply "believe" everything your mommy said and sleep like a naive little baby.

[grl]

Trying to argue with someone who believes in conspiracy theory is like trying to argue with a religious believer. I don't waste my time debating with conspiracy theorists just as I don't waste my time arguing about religious beliefs. If you want to believe that Jesus rose from the dead or that Mohammed split the moon, or that Moses received a tablet from God that's your belief and I am not going to argue with you; I know you think it is the truth and you have all sorts of evidence for it...but it's a belief! Same with all the conspiracy theories of our time (note that conspiracy theories change according to the era), they are beliefs and I am not going to argue about your belief. Where I do draw the line at my involvement is when beliefs threaten others. We can see this in our current day with the beliefs of radical Islamists. People on this site, like Widowmaker, is where I draw the line on conspiracy believers. Presently, you conspiracy buffs are on the margins, but as history shows, people need a scapegoat when their world goes bad and extreme views from the margin will often provide a scapegoat. I do wish all you conspiracy believers would recognize that what you are is "believers," nothing more and that your beliefs can be dangerous. 

[Sabibaby]

@grl - you want a good conspiracy? Jesus wasn't born on Christmas, regardless of where you stand on religion. So why is it celibrated as his birthday?

[tip e. canoe]

so the priests could keep all the magic mushrooms for themselves?

http://animamrecro.wordpress.com/2006/12/30/hallucinogenic-mushrooms-and...

and if you really want to go down a rabbit hole:

http://johnallegro.org/books/sacred-mushroom-and-the-cross-1970/

[MagicHandPuppet]

@grl - You may want to reconsider your generalizations and perhaps do just a little research.  I know, I know... just like those with religious "beliefs", your opinions don't really need any facts to back them up, do they?  Well, if you ever change your mind and decide to pursue rational conclusions based on research and critical thinking, you might want to google "Operation Northwoods" as a good starting place.  The book, A Creature From Jeckyll Island is another good source of well documented events involving our monetary system.  This will at least shed some light for you that it is indeed possible (probable... or even absolute) that conspiracies exist.  Let's not forget that Julius Caesar died by more than one knife.

[Nostradumbass]

.

.

"Look, if we didn't have so many corrupt buffoons working "for us" in goverment, I'd put some credence behind the 9/11 theories"

But what if the 911 events were outsourced to competent agents?

[Bloodstool]

"But what if the 911 events were outsourced to competent agents?"

What if the Bay of Pigs planning had been outsourced? 

Come on, you're injecting hypotheticals that aren't based on any facts.  Once and if they are, your question becomes relevant.  Until then, we have the facts that we have to work with. 

So, back to the Bay of Pigs.  Here's another gub'ment effort to do something sneaky, which fell flat on its face.  Too many moving parts.  Too many ends to tie up.  Too many eyes and ears involved.  Nah.  Not plausible. 

[Seer]

Manhattan Project

That _SOME_ things failed (or assumed to have failed) does not mean that ALL things fail.  There are lots of things that I'm sure that the CIA would claim were ragging successes, yet, a person such as the late Chalmers Johnson took issue with such claims: Johnson is credited for popularizing the term "Blowback" [as pertains to govt ops]).

(and no, I didn't junk you)

[caconhma]

The volume & scope of Winileaks info (volumes of inter-agencies info) tells me that the info came either from either

• Directly from the White House inter-agency coordination group (absolutely impossible since very few traceable individuals have the access to such data) or
• The US multi-agency secure-communication channels were compromised (absolutely impossible since this is a job for entire NSA staff) or
• It is a US government covert operation (this is the only possible explanation)

In reality, the Wikileaks info offers no real news. It is mostly gossips to promote the US, NATO, and Israel domestic and foreign agenda.  Specifically, the freedom of information in America is on its way to Russians, Chinese, or other closed & non-democratic societies standards. Even a chopper killing civilians in Iraq is not really a news after the Abu Ghraib prison war-crimes revelations.

Well, we are almost there with almost all media channels (with only partial Internet exception) are under a government control. In my observation, the US media is not much different from what I observed in the former Soviet block or even today China.

[Dan Duncan]

Psst.

Hey I'm down here. 

Shhh....They're listening. Keep it quiet would ya? 

Just wanted to let you know:  Engdahl and Smartknowledgeu are the real CIA operatives in this story.  So, when they tell you Assange is also lying in a cover up to protect the government that's lying--it is Engdahl and Smartknowledgeu who are lying.

So don't believe them!  Everything they say is a lie!  They are masterminds in espionage and linguistics.  Their specialty is acting as counter agents in a Grand Liar's Paradox as they string together double negative eliminations:

I swear...I am not shitting you when I tell you NOT to heed Engdahl's message when he says:  "Hey guys, I'd be lying to you if I neglected to mention that Assange is NOT an ANTI-goverment counter-agent."

[Hot Shakedown]

Excellent point Duncan. Either way, the PTB has created a range of options to explain away an event (ie. gain contol of the consequences for their desired outcome) of any situation that may or may not be within their sphere of influence.

[jomama]

very plausible.  nothing is ever, ever how it seems.

[lynnybee]

wow.   more education for me.    i love ZEROHEDGE & thanks for opening my eyes even WIDER !    now, how do we extricate ourselves & OUR CHILDREN out of their clutches !!!??

[cmalbatros]

Paranoid? The real question should be  - am I paranoid enough?. "Trust No One"

[laosuwan]

by laosuwan
on Sun, 12/05/2010 - 19:57
#780545

i would not be surprised that some day we learn wikileaks was a creation of the usa just like al qaeda was.

After all, if you think about it, the word leaks implies someting coming from the inside not the outside.

• edit
• reply
• flag as junk (0) 

[Wynn]

skepticism and cynicism are powerful tools, use with care

[Stun Gun]

CD, are you referring to the same government that brought us the Department of Motor Vehicles?

Stun Gun

[Cognitive Dissonance]

No I am not. Your argument is silly. Just because the meat and potatoes functions of government are bloated and poorly run doesn't mean that the highly specialized departments inside that government (and more and more these days, functions contracted out to private firms) such as the CIA/NSA/DIA etc are just as poorly run.

I always get a kick reading about some supposed disaster run by the CIA etc. It helps the average Joe to believe that these agencies are harmless and incompetent. This is exactly the public image I would like to portray to those who don't wish to think any deeper and look any harder. The CIA/NSA/DIA etc are very good at what they do, their core competency. And contrary to popular belief, they all do engage in domestic operations.

[Bloodstool]

CD, now who's being silly?  Iran-Contra was one intended to be uncovered?  The Gulf of Tonkin Incident was meant to be uncovered?  Our attempt to rescue hostages in the "Hostage Crisis," under Carter's watch, wasn't an abortion?  Grenada was smoothly run?  I could go on and on.  Government is by definition a consensus driven organization.  And, by definition, they don't get the cream of the crop, in terms of personnel.

Are they some sneaky buggers and do they get away with a ton of stuff?  I'm sure they do.  But the point is, most of these folks are bunglers.  God, more examples come to mind.  Just look at the intelligence community's inability to prevent guys like Walker, et al, from stealing motherlodes of state secrets, right under the noses of the people responsible for preventing that kind of stuff. 

No, folks can "junk" my comments, because they don't like what they hear.  But, I maintain there is too much institutional incompetence and too many inherent incentives for political foes to capitalize on the secrets of others, to make 9/11 or other conspiracies plausible. 

[Cognitive Dissonance]

Your conflating disasters and the desire to be uncovered. The Gulf of Tonkin was not a disaster. It was highly successful and only after it was long buried in the memory hole was it "uncovered". Iran Contra was also quite successful and also not what you think it was.

You are assuming what was "exposed" to the public was the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Or even it's real purpose. I can say the same about all your examples. If you base your views upon what is reported in the press or even what is "leaked" you are being manipulated.

[Bloodstool]

So, then, you CD are an insider and know the "real deal," eh?

Look, I respect your comments on this board.  You have a lot of smart things to say.  And I certainly don't claim to know the whole truth or even part of the truth behind any of the incidents mentioned.  That said, I'm pretty confident in saying you probably don't either.  What I can do is think - think about who's involved and who benefits most, think about how our government actually works (and it's as far from being a smoothly run dictatorship as China is), and think about the individual ethics, values and loyalties of many average Americans, who would be involved in any of the schemes described in this chain of comments.  You can only arrive at one conclusion: our government pulls stuff off in the interests of the common good (or what they perceive it to be), but bungle the shit out of most everything (whether that's Homeland Security, Healthcare or Social Security, or FEMA/Katrina).  

[Cognitive Dissonance]

I never claim to know exactly what is or is not going on nor what has gone on. The only thing I know for certain is that it is in the powers-that-be self interest to lie to you and I about everything, especially motive and methods. Thus I always start from that point as the default position.

The MSM has been at best enablers of the power elite and at worst compliant and complicit tools since there was a MSM. That means we go back to the bible and even further. To assume that what we are being told by the MSM is even approaching truth is misguided.

The problem is that since the MSM "reports" accidents and town council meetings fairly accurately, we tend to assume they report everything else with equal accuracy. This is where we are deluding ourselves.

[DollarMenu]

"I never claim to know exactly what is or is not going on nor what has gone on. The only thing I know for certain is that it is in the powers-that-be self interest to lie to you and I about everything, especially motive and methods. Thus I always start from that point as the default position."

Thank you CogDis.

This is my basic MO as well.

Even though it keeps me on the social fringe,

I have found that space to be an easy place to live.

[Azannoth]

Even if WikiLeaks.org is a CIA operation, that does not mean we can't 'highjack' it and get some real truth out

[Bloodstool]

Yup...the government wiz-kids that brought you Katrina, the Gulf Oil Disaster, the annual flu shot medicine shortage fiasco, Watergate, Iran Contra, Gulf of Tonkin, etc, etc, etc. has managed to finally get its act together sufficiently to coordinate all the brain surgeons (who chose bureaucracy as their chose professions, instead of medicine), into getting their stories right, about what to say about the most significant terrorist event to ever occur on U.S. soil.  Sounds plausible to me...not.

Look, if we didn't have so many corrupt buffoons working "for us" in goverment, I'd put some credence behind the 9/11 theories.  But, for every "proof of conspiracy" offered, there's another debunking it.   For example, I've seen a site somewhere - way back when I was looking into the conspiracies, as well - which actually gave several examples of skyscrapers collapsing due to fire, debunking the "can't happen due to fire" theory.

Anyway, I'm sure I'll be called a government agent now.  But, I've always believed in questioning everything I'm told - including the conspiracy theories.  

[ATG]

http://www.trutv.com/video/conspiracy-theory/pentagon-conspiracy.html 2:37

[antidisestablis...]

And ZH is an undercover operation of Goldman Sachs.  It's time to let your paranoia run wild, everything is the opposite of what it seems!

[Salinger]

and if you were to journey back in time would you  also consider this article from The Herald to be rooted in paranoia

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=1EYsAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xMoEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4...

[Farcical Aquati...]

Chilling. But don't waste your time. Not only will they not understand until it's too late, but they will embrace it as it occurs.  The rest of us need to consider getting outta Dodge sooner than later.

[ATG]

The late Christopher Story considered the US invasion of Iraq equivalent to Hitler's invasion of Checkoslovakia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Story

Lord Monckton describes what is happening now a rise of global facism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Viscount_Monckton...

[grl]

I knew it!

[Kina]

The Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd, who suffers at the hands of WikiLeaks, has on two occasions come out stongly for Assasnge, the protection of his rights, stating that he had done nothing wrong, that the fault lay with US security....and that he would make sure Assange got the laptop he was after. Pretty much to the cheers of many Australians.

The Prime Minister on the other hand has her chains yanked by the US and is careful to avoid giving any support to Assange. She however has to be very careful because she has only a majority of one in the government. And one of her coalition partners is a former Whistleblower from within Intelligence against the then government on Iraq.  He of course is very sympathetic to Assange, and has the capacity to bring the govt down, and has vaguely implied that he could, depending on future course of events.

[Hot Shakedown]

No doubt in my mind that Wikileaks is total psyops. "The powers that be" (PTB)are planting a seed of cover if BofA gets to the point of no return and it is decided that it is not TBTF or that it is indeed so big a problem, it will fail no matter what. PTB has brilliantly created "options" and a potential "reason" or "cause" to explain the bank's failure which could lead to a manufactured need for more internet regulation. The scheme takes care of two issues: cover for the fact that BofA may be out of control and a convenient "event" to reign in control of the internet... a la gulf of Tonkin.

[Miramanee]

Deception is an art, no less so than are the works of a Michelangelo:

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/8119909/

[Kina]

9/11 isn't quite the same issue in Australia as it is in the US. I have never heard anybody speak of conspiracy theories and all that I know accept the incident as reported at the time. The incident has rarely rated a mention for years.

Assange discounting conspiracy theories would be reflecting the majority feeling of it here, and probably most places outside the US.

I also don't buy the conspiracy story re WikiLeaks, though I guess everything is possible. Then again a million things are possible.

One thing the leaks have done and the subsequent attack on Assange and WikiLeaks, is made freedom of speech, human rights and the aggressive nature of the US a larger issue, making people more aware of protecting their freedoms.

It would have made it much harder for anybody to propose any sort of limitation on the internet here.

The latest poll in Australia has support for Assange and Wikileaks 2:1 in favour and the majority are against the Australian governments criticism of WikiLeaks and treatment of Assange.

And curiously the strongest support for Assange comes from the older generation, maybe because they have longer memories.

[psychobilly]

Actually, 67% of Australians in a poll conducted by the Herald Sun agreed that Kevin Bracken's conclusion that 9/11 was a government conspiracy was "reasonable."

It's obvious you have no idea what you are babbling about.

[Advoc8tr]

911 is what woke me up along with many other Australians. Everyone here at least knows of 911 and many openly question the "official version" to varying degrees. Our problem is that not much has gone wrong here yet ... so the apathy continues.

It can't hurt to keep an open mind and reserve absolute judgement until more evidence is available either way. Surely we have all learned at least that much?

I am of the opinion he currently downplays the 911 issue when asked because taking the truth movement's side at this time and perhaps without supporting leaked evidence would alienate him from a huge chunk of American citizens.

He may well have something? which he would not of course divulge prior to its release due to the instantaneous death by accident that would follow - who knows?

I like the idea of and potential this Wikileaks phenomenon presents us with so I'll give the benefit of the doubt while keeping a critical eye on events as they unfold.

[Die Weiße Rose]

who the fuck gives a shit about 9/11 ?

the US pushed peoples buttons for years all around the world,

invasions, attacks dirty little foreign affairs and then one day...someone snaps .

That's what happened with 9/11. A wake-up call was long overdue !

Compare 9/11 to Hiroshima or Nagasaki and maybe then you get some perspective of scale!

9/11 was a wake up call for the US from the rest of the world,

who is just getting a bit tired of being pushed and bullied for years

by fucking out of control US foreign policy.

[Die Weiße Rose]

In addition to diplomatic cables, Manning is believed to have provided Wiki-Leaks with helicopter gun camera video of an errant US attack in Baghdad on unarmed journalists, and with war logs from Iraq and Afghanistan.”

If you think that the US government created wiki-leaks as a con job you are either completely stupid or you are trying to cover up for the crimes of the US government, exposed by wiki-leaks !

Check out the evidence,the videos, they are all over the Internet by now and the US Government is in desperate damage control.They know that everyone wants an end to the Afghan and Iraq war and there are going to be a lot of questions asked!

Julian Assange is an Australian citizen and even the Australian Government is in damage control against wiki-leaks.So the only thing left to minimize damage is for the human rights violator Governments of the US and England and Australia to discredit wiki-leaks and act as if it was a US plant to censor the Internet.No-one in their right mind is really that stupid! All you need to do is research some of the leaks about Afghanistan and Iraq and other documents and you will see that the US would want to hide those crimes forever!

But now the truth about American war-crimes is out and so what can they do ? Nothing!

Dick Cheney and George Bush and Toni Blair and John Howard and Gondoleezza Rice and that whole miserable bunch of war-criminals and human rights violators should be tried at an international court for crimes against humanity and put away for life or euthanized !

And those fucking neo-cons who try to discredit wikileaks are just scared to be exposed for what they are !

Fuck those Bastards,they need to be exposed and wiki-leaks will go on doing exactly that !

Why should these bastards organize their dirty schemes and crimes against people in secret while on tax-payers pay-roll ?

Fuck those politicians and their politics of Power by division and fear . Fuck them !

Wiki-leaks is real alright and it is up to each one to study the source and look at the evidence. It is there for all eyes to see. Make up your own mind .

[ATG]

International Red Cross, LBJ AG Ramsey Clark et al prepared briefs on impeachment for US War Crimes

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/15/AR200903...

http://deoxy.org/wc/warcrim2.htm

http://impeachforpeace.org/index.php

[Keith Piccirillo]

In Orwell's "1984", government censors erased all traces of news articles embarrassing to Big Brother by sending them down an incineration chute called the “memory hole.”

Assange cannot now be made an unperson which is a blackwhite statement on its own. He's more likely to become like #7 in The Prisoner, just a dulling unused tool put in the shed, to slow down the cultural acceleration of Crimethink.

[Widowmaker]

Of course Julius Genachowski is a jew, just like Lieberman.  

These stewards of two masters are removing, containing and controlling away every right non-jews have -- in the name of "your protection."

This is affirmed with "net-neutrality" that is anything but.  Remember this guy campaigned with the promise to do EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE, which has since been thrown to the corporate dogs on fraud street.

WAKE THE FUCK UP PEOPLE, YOU LOST THE WAR TODAY!!

[lynnybee]

I'm just asking, still learning ...... why are there so many jewish people in the U.S. GOVERNMENT anyway?   I never even realized that until I started reading articles on the internet.    I didn't even know until just a few months ago that Rahm Emmanual was jewish !!   I'm asking a legitimate question.   (p.s. i did not junk you) ......... regards !

[Boxed Merlot]

I'm just asking, still learning ...... why are there so many jewish people in the U.S. GOVERNMENT anyway?...

My sentiments too. Here is California we have Boxer, Feinstein and Pelosi all jewish females serving as representatives of one of the most diverse populations ever assembled on the face of the earth. 

I'm not one to say Jewish lineage means lockstep pastoral conduct in directing the affairs of the non-jewish as history is full of jew on jew one-up-manship as well.  More likely the familiarity of "law" and recordation, including the dispersal of information through the ages assures a disproportionate representation in the higher eschalons of societies.

As a people, the ability to remain united is still not found in the the jewish genepool.  Solomon's kid couldn't hold it together though he was afforded every means and opportunity to do so. imo