This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
WikiLeaks, WikiDrama and WikiGossip
What should we make of the Wikileaks story?
Obviously, the
Swedish "sex crime" charges are ridiculous, as are the death threats
against Wikileaks founds Julian Assange. See this, this and this.
Some
leading first amendment advocates support Wikileaks as a vital
resource. For example, John Perry Barlow - founder of the Electronic
Frontier Foundation (a great organization with a long and proven track
record in fighting censorship) says:
The first serious infowar is now engaged. The field of battle is WikiLeaks. You are the troops.
Likewise, the ACLU has been fighting for Wikileaks for years.
And Daniel Ellsberg and Noam Chomsky think Wikileaks is the real deal.
However, many savvy observers argue that that Wikileaks is not what it seems.
For
example, former U.S. National Security Adviser under President Carter
(and top foreign policy advisor) Zbigniew Brzezinski doesn’t think all
the leaked information coming out of Wikileaks is a result of Army PFC
Bradley Manning, and suspects a foreign intelligence service may be
providing the more embarrassing leaks for their own political reasons.
As Brzezinski told PBS:
The real issue is, who is feeding Wikipedia
on this issue — Wiki — Wiki — WikiLeaks on this issue? They’re getting
a lot of information which seems trivial, inconsequential, but some of
it seems surprisingly pointed.***
For example, there
are references to a report by our officials that some Chinese leaders
favor a reunified Korea under South Korea.
This is clearly designed
to embarrass the Chinese and our relationship with them. 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, rather, 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, because some of these items that are being emphasized and have surfaced are very pointed.
And
I wonder whether, in fact, there aren’t some operations
internationally, intelligence services, that are feeding stuff to
WikiLeaks, because it is a unique opportunity to embarrass us, to
embarrass our position, but also to undermine our relations with
particular governments.
For example, leaving aside the personal
gossip about Sarkozy or Berlusconi or Putin, the business about the
Turks is clearly calculated in terms of its potential impact on
disrupting the American-Turkish relationship.
***
Seeding — seeding it is very easy.
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.
Other smart people point out that - while there is pointed information challenging the actions of other countries
- the information coming from Wikileaks about the U.S. is more of the
nature of gossip, and doesn't actually challenge U.S. foreign or
domestic policy is a direct manner. For example, the information
disclosed to date doesn't challenge the narrative of the "War on Terror"
itself, the government's handling of the economic crisis, or any other
central American policy.
So whether Wikileaks is a first
amendment champion or an intelligence service psychological operation
aiming to persuade and embarrass, so far it has mainly been a bunch of
gossip in terms of leaks about America.
If you don't believe me,
read some of the actual cables which have been released. While there
have been some stunners about foreign countries, the ones regarding U.S.
actions have been nothing but idle chatter about well-known people or
events, providing interesting but wholly irrelevant details about what
people were wearing or who they slept with. No breakthrough
revelations which actually challenge core U.S. policy.
(Many people are saying that the disclosure that the U.S. has spied on
the United Nations shows the value of Wikileaks. But it has been known
for years that the U.S. spies on the U.N. See this, this and this.)
As the very mainstream, Murdoch-owned Herald Sun notes:
We're told the leaks are "explosive" and "sensational", revealing America's "dark face".
Rubbish.
In fact, the WikiLeaks dump of more than 250,000 classified cables
from US diplomats reveals little more than gossip on the embassy
circuit.***
These leaks expose no crime and nail no US lie.
***
Yet
Assange may also have done the US an inadvertent favour, just as he
did with his earlier dump of documents on Iraq, which showed there was
actually no conspiracy and no war crimes being hushed up.
***
[It] all confirms the world is as menacing as the US grimly says.
***
Overall, then, there is more in these leaks to confirm the US view of this world than there is to comfort its critics.
As the head of long-time whistleblower Cryptome (and former Wikileaks supporter - John Young - argues, Wikileaks has been more hype than substance:
Cryptome
does not seek publicity or media coverage. Wikileaks does by
issuing press releases, taunting the media, orchestrating bombshell
releases, glamourizing Julian Assange, behaving mysteriously, ...
exaggerating the value of what it publishes, editorializes about
its publications excessively -- all the methods used by those who
believe excessive valuation is a good thing.
So far - despite the media frenzy - it's more like WikiGossip than WikiLeaks.
Don't get distracted by the WikiDrama ... Unless WikiLeaks releases something which discloses criminal behavior by a large American bank, more damning information about the government's actions than the Fed's own data release, or facts which undermine the false war on terror narrative - Brzezinski himself told the Senate that the war on terror is "a mythical historical narrative" - such as previously unknown false flags, then it's mainly a publicity-seeking melodrama more than an authentic challenge to American power.
Remember that the corporate press tends to be pro-war.
The more cynical might argue that the fact that the corporate press is
publishing all of the cables released by Wikileaks could imply that the
material is not fundamentally of an anti-war nature.
The more cynical also point out that many
credible whistleblowers - including former high-level government
officials - have been ignored over the last 10 years by the corporate
media when they have disclosed facts which challenged core U.S. policy. But Wikileaks is getting 24/7 coverage. I'm
strongly for whistleblowers ... I'm just not convinced that WikiLeaks
is as hard-hitting as other whistleblower groups out there.
All people of good faith agree that freedom
of information and freedom of speech are vital in a free society. The
real question is whether this particular organization is made up of
WikiHeroes, WikiPublicityHounds, WikiDupes, or WikiDisinfoAgents.
Only time will tell.
- advertisements -
cut and paste error - give me a break!!
"...WHITE HOUSE..."
That was the punchline.
Try reading and comprehending for a change.
My bad. Multitasking and not doing it well
cut and paste error - give me a break!!
If you live near DC or ever visit, I have to recommend a visit to this place as it is one of the coolest museums in DC... I have been to a few...
http://www.spymuseum.org/
If you have kids they will love it.
They might love the Computer museum in Boston too...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Computer_Museum,_Boston
Off topic but cool places to learn new stuff that are somewhat related to what we are all discussing.
Julian is in my few a hero and started something that can't be stopped.
Many more wikileaks will arise.Those gouverment mothfck spying on us
24/7,we the people have the right to know what they are
up to.This man should be protected,like the wistleblower Andrew Mc
Where is the voice of the humanrights organisations like amesty.
Most of the time I agree with your wrightings George but I
really think you underestimate this one.Freedom of information
and freedom of speach are really important in a free society.
Not so fast Silversinner:
Andrew Maguire has gone silent fearing for his safety. He is not being protected and the investigation into his 'accident" has gone nowhere and is basically dead with the media and the British police.
"On March 25th at the CFTC Public Hearing on Precious Metals GATA made a dramatic revelation of a whistleblower source, Andrew Maguire, who has first hand evidence of gold and silver market manipulation by JPMorganChase and who has even tipped off the CFTC in advance of manipulative attacks on gold and silver. Just as in the Madoff case the regulator has done nothing to stop such manipulation.
"On March 26th while out shopping with his wife, Mr. Maguire's car was hit by a car careening out of a side road. The driver of the vehicle then tried to escape. When a pedestrian eye-witness attempted to block the driver's escape he accelerated at him and would have hit him had the pedestrian not jumped out of the way. The car then hit two other cars in escaping. The driver was apprehended by the police after police helicopters were called in and following a high speed chase."
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/205674-Andrew-McGuire-whistle-blower-on-market-manipulation-injured-in-hit-and-run-accident
Bill Murphy was cold-cocked with brass knuckles by an unknown bankster hitman when he first started GATA.
http://www.davejanda.com/audio/BillMurphy120510.mp3
These fuckers play rough.
Well you can get in big trouble when you mess with Russian Mafia money.
"Freedom of information and freedom of speach are really important in a free society."
Of course. Everyone agrees with that.
But that doesn't addess the issue of whether they are WikiHeroes, WikiPublicityHounds, or WikiDisinfoAgents.
The problem is....we re not in a free society ! we have liberties, but not Freedom.
Not every one agrees with this principale GW other
wise some people would not have been killed or jailed.
The issue is not the information itself,the quality can
of course be quiestioned,but rather if we are willing to
fight for everey ones free acces to information.
I respect your opinion on the quality,i do not have such
strong opinion;I just want to know and be able to read it.
WikiKabuki
It is %100 done by the TPTB, anyone really beleive anyone would sleep with this dude or 2 different people in a few weeks time?
I haven't read any of the cables, save for the MSM summaries and digests such as Drudge; but the first thing that jumps out at me is:
What is being hidden?
What vital, strategic information is being concealed by all the furor over WL? Who is operating in deeper cover while JA takes the public hits and harassment? What psyops / black ops / Treasury ops are going on that we won't hear about (until much later, if ever) because WL is drowning out other news?
We are being handled - AGAIN. Count on it.
pretty much my take on it, too. can't wait till somebody ferrets out the actual, real "troof", if it can be found
Please look into the FCC rules and upcoming vote.
I am not saying this is it, but it has all the makings of a sort of Martial Law for the Internet in the CONUS.
It looks like a stealth black swan...
No MSM coverage
Addresses all kinds of "problems" that are being either caused or exacerbated by the Internet
Exact "Problems" are not being made public?
Think about the Patriot Act, The TARP Bailouts, The Healthcare Reform Bill, TSA, Etc... Do you think that they think they need your permission to "do what is right" for you?
Recent stories in the MSM relating to the control of Internet are all over the place.
Could this be what you are looking for?
I honestly wonder.
I gather there won't be much complaining about it on the Internet after the fact though...
I'd like to see some analysis of the new FCC Internet rules that will be voted on December 21st.
The FCC is being given "control" of the Internet. It has rules that are going before a vote, yet the rules will not be made public until after the vote.
I know the FCC is going to address Net Nuetrality and issues relating to income reporting on the Web.
Is this what drove the Netfilx CEO to jump?
What else is in there? DNS Grabs? All those pesky Blogs? Online PM Brokers?
How much weighting will this WL issue be given in voting considerations?
Makes a thinking fella really wonder?
Perhaps someone at ZH would take a look into this before it is upon us?
"The FCC is being given "control" of the Internet. It has rules that are going before a vote, yet the rules will not be made public until after the vote."
Lame Ducks are a particularly dangerous fowl.
Does Chomsky really support Wiki and Assange or does he just not support assasinating him?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHfYtvYRgdk
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/chomsky-peter-singer-wikileaks-assange/
GW, did you read yourself some of the 1090 out of 251.287 telegrams published so far?
Is it "mainly been a bunch of gossip", stuff like Sec. of State Clinton ordering diplomats to perform illegal spying, information theft and even DNA collection?
This revelation alone, and its flagrant violation of the Vienna Convention on diplomatic protections, has showed that the US regime honors the most basic international rules on their breach only.
By deliberately thrashing the Geneva conventions, the US regime turned American military into fair game. Likewise, the demonstrated fact that US diplomats will abuse their guarantees and perform sanctioned acts of espionage has lowered the standing of all US personell abroad to that of a gutter rat.
Instead of relaying John Young's sour grapes, please read the cables for yourself.
The U.S. has spied on the U.N. for years. See this, this and this.
We shouldn't mix two seperate issues here. The first and most important issue is the authoritarian reaction by the US govt to Assagne and Wikkileaks which bears on freedom of speech, freedom of association and gerneral freedom to go about your business without persection by various countries.
The US has coereced Sweden to corrupt its legals system and Interpol to get Assange, had Australia play hard ball with one of its subjects in contrast to the proper responsibility an Australian, had the likes of Amazon, Paypal, Visa, Mastercard, Swiss bank account etc frozen so these people cant go about their normal lives. They not being criminals in any sense of the word.
Then we have sundry high profile US politicians and political commentators taking up the fight for the US state by recommending death.
That is the first and most important issue.
The second issue doesn't only relate to Wikkileaks, it relates to MSM generally.
Do we think the establishment MSM doesn't receive leaks from parties or govt with ulterior purposes both in the US and any other country?
More likely the US itself has leaked stuff to Wikkileaks for disemination and no doubt other countries.
But where Wikkileaks has it over the paid for MSM is they publish the raw data without the spin.
Legal systems have no power during any political crisis, but instead are abused due to their "inability" to have prevented it. Simply put, governments create their own demand through failure.
For example, nothing that Lincoln did in prosecuting his war was legal, but he did it anyway causing the deaths of 5% of the US population, all while imprisoning anyone who as much as spoke out against him. But, since the storyline was that the war was all about slavery, he has been forgiven by the historians who have deified him.
Meanwhile, Lincoln did not free a single slave in the Union, as the Emancipation Proclamation only concerned the seceding states. Within the Union, only the governors had the power to end slavery, which they did after the end of the war.
Well, if Chomsky thinks it's legit, then I definitely don't. That man is the walking, talking definition of manufactured dissent. He critiques the actions of puppets and their abstract collectives, all the while avoiding discussion of the puppeteers who are real, living, breathing individuals.
When I first encountered him during my lefty activist days (I'm a recovering do-gooder), he seemed so brilliant, yet frustratingly always moved the focus of social problems onto unaccountable collectives. Once I read his book "Manufactured Consent" his role in it all became crystal clear.
Simply put, he fulfils the role of allowable dissent. That he states WikiLeaks does as well is of no surprise.
@ Definitely NotApplicable
Ef your short memory: "What WE Say Goes" wasn't published all that long ago. And yes it deals with plenty of living, breathing shit heads that Americans have once again proven too stupid/apathetic/duped/brain-washed to indict.
N.Chomsky has been trying to be decent, honest, and just his whole life by exposing the truth as best he can, and you gave up because he isn't 'specific' enough for your lordship? Who're you trying to kid here, pal? 'Cuz I can assure that you're failing miserably when it comes to convincing anyone with an operating brain and conscience. But maybe that's your thing, failure. Oh wait, you alluded to that already:
"A recovering do-gooder"... so now you're working on what, "Complete Asshole"?
What a load of bollocks.
You'll have to forigive me if I take your insipid, sweeping generalisation,
"Well, if Chomsky thinks it's legit, then I definitely don't."
FWIW.
Regards
Chomsky doesn't see an inside job with either JFK or 9/11. Just sayin. If we judge him solely on East Timor, well he's great, but nobody gave a shit about that expose did they?
"Well, if Chomsky thinks it's legit, then I definitely don't."
I wonder what the ole man had to say when the East Anglia e-mails were "leaked"...I'm thinkin he wanted someone drawn & quartered over it...LOL...of course we know the NYT's opinion of it...they refused to publish them.
All the news we deem fit to print ;-)
The following 5 Papers have the entire non-redacted collection of "Wiki Cables".
Le Monde
The New York Times (was shared by Guardian not given directly from WL)
The Guardian
Der Spiegel
El Pais
So the MSM is hoo-hoo deep in the dirt and they have pretty much clammed up.
I don't see the heat coming down on these guys... From either side.
They don't have the contents of the "Insurance" file. But that is a classic Schrodinger's Cat and can be safely treated as such by discounting it as a meaningless puzzle pox that will entertain and distract while more important work occurs elsewhere. Until it opens.
So why don't they step up and "fix" the free world with what they have already in the mean time?
I dunno. Wish I did.
First cup of coffee...and it's fffuuukkkin freezing...forgot link of one of our finest editors;
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/evan-thomas-obama-is-sort-of-god
"So the MSM is hoo-hoo deep in the dirt and they have pretty much clammed up."
Yes they have. There are relationships. There have always been hotline "requests" for them to report this or not report that...mostly...sadly...they have become an echo chamber...a caricature of their former selves, preening & fawning over each others statements with inane, ego gratifying, statements to each other such as "good question Marla".
To be expected when they all come from the same university system, where diversity, especially in thought, is not a requirement for graduation.
"So why don't they step up and "fix" the free world with what they have already in the mean time?"
It might take away from the editors admonition to Ann Compton to find out first what Michelle Obama is wearing to the next state function...they do so enjoy style over substance, and Michelle is married to, as Evan Thomas (Editor of Newsweek) said, "sort of a God"...ROTFLMAO!
My first take on cablegate was that it was mostly trivial. But there are a few items that represent serious offenses:
- If the Secretary of State ordered diplomats to spy on their counterparts, that's a violation of international law.
- I really doubt the idea of Britain stockpiling cluster munitions on its soil, again in contravention of international law, one day fell out of a tree.
- I know it's naive, but I really liked the old days when Congress actually had to declare war. It's only fair, at least, that we should know we're at war in Yemen.
All three of those were either already known (Read about UN spying under Bush and cluster bombs in Britain last year, no links offhand DYODD). Or in the case of Yemen, a non-shocker. I need to see something really explosive leaked to buy into the WL story completely.
Damage Control = Convince people that the leak is an 'authorized' leak and all Psy-ops
I just psy-opsed-your-psy-ops.
Thank You, GW!
That was some fair and clear headed analysis.
Now if WL has anything on todays Silver action... I'd love to see that!
Is it just me? Or did the elimination really hit the ventilation AFTER his threatened leak "on a major bank"? I think he hit a raw nerve.
Wait though, I've read on ZH that JA first mentioned having info specifically on BAC back in 2009. If that's true then the timing could be part of operation street cred. Not saying that is what is happening, but the rush to judgement against JA and also in favor of JA has been too quick IMO. Impossible to say whats going on until we see more concrete results or info dumps.
The timing is all a part of the narrative. Charges were already forthcoming when the bank info teaser was leaked.
That is not the point. The point is that the money flow stopped when he said the bank leak was coming. Paypal, AMZN, Mastercard, the Swiss Bank, etc.
Yeah, I thought the trigger for bankileaks was Assange's arrest, so why are we waiting?!
I see the frozen funds as adding capital to Wikileaks credibility...
Heh, if they do release some really damning information on BAC or its ilk there are going to be a whole lot of posters on ZH who will have to get a new hobby, or at least take a bite of the shit sandwich they've been preparing for themselves with their whole 'psyop here, psyop there, here a psyop, there a psyop, everywhere a psyop-psyop' CIA/Assange conflation.
Regards
"Then time will tell just who has fellAnd who's been left behind"
...........................................................................................
Keep that shit sandwich yous just made in yours own frig at home. Don't want it GoinBadd before y'all is a eaten it youself someday soon.
I see this has your blood boiling as well Howard... nice to hear from you, and hope you are well!
Watchin' the classifieds for "looking for the next LHO" ads... you know there working on it as we speak.
Fox's Shep Smith said the same thing...
Thought the same thing until I realized that Assange announced that he had the bank hard drive over one year ago. Perhaps the banks are feeling more vulnerable one year later.
Thanks GW... I've been doing a slow burn on that one!
Shep is "the man," and I have no idea how he stays with an organization like Faux... haven't heard the truth on the issue from anyone else in the media.
Sorry to bust your bubble but he's just another fucking talking head. That's what he does, it's all he does. He doesn't decide content, he doesn't spend time in cars, eating day old take out food to get the scoop. As long as Fox keeps the hookers and nose candy rolling, he's bought. Brush up on your Don Henley.
I'm hardly a big fan... he's just so much better than the rest of the Faux crowd... he went after his collegues big time on the torture issue, and I admire him for that.
The big question is why a Fox host (of all people) is the only voice of truth on the issue?
The WikiLeaks people wish to illustrate that governments are morally inferior entities.
All collectives are morally inferior (null actually) because only individuals possess morality.
+1
Does that include the Pope?