From The Wall Street Journal
"The guy was only publishing that which he read. And if he read it, it's because someone else wrote it. The blame doesn't belong to who released it, the blame is with who wrote it," the former union firebrand said. "So, WikiLeaks, my solidarity for disclosing (the documents) and my protest against the siege against freedom of expression."
Showing posts with label cablegate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cablegate. Show all posts
Thursday, December 9, 2010
And Voices Rise Up In Defense Of Freedom.
Sides are being chosen. Swords being drawn.
From ABC News.
Wilkie scathing of PM's response to WikiLeaks
Former whistleblower and independent MP Andrew Wilkie has issued a scathing attack against the Prime Minister's handling of the WikiLeaks affair.
Mr Wilkie says Julia Gillard is showing contempt for the rule of law by failing to give Australian WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange the presumption of innocence.
Mr Assange was arrested by British police on Tuesday in response to a Swedish warrant on alleged sex crimes and faces possible extradition.
"I believe the Prime Minister is showing a contempt for the rule of law - the way she has ruled out the presumption of innocence and instead there seems to be a presumption of guilt when it comes to Mr Assange," Mr Wilkie said.
"That's not how we do things in Australia and she should know better.
"And as a lawyer, she should know she's potentially compromised any legal proceedings that might be brought against Mr Assange if in fact he makes it to the US.
"I believe also she's shown a complete contempt for Australia's sovereignty - the way she has defaulted to the interests of the US, instinctively it seems, rather than the interests of an Australian citizen."
Mr Wilkie says he is disgusted by Ms Gillard's response and her disregard for free speech.
From ABC News.
Wilkie scathing of PM's response to WikiLeaks
Former whistleblower and independent MP Andrew Wilkie has issued a scathing attack against the Prime Minister's handling of the WikiLeaks affair.
Mr Wilkie says Julia Gillard is showing contempt for the rule of law by failing to give Australian WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange the presumption of innocence.
Mr Assange was arrested by British police on Tuesday in response to a Swedish warrant on alleged sex crimes and faces possible extradition.
"I believe the Prime Minister is showing a contempt for the rule of law - the way she has ruled out the presumption of innocence and instead there seems to be a presumption of guilt when it comes to Mr Assange," Mr Wilkie said.
"That's not how we do things in Australia and she should know better.
"And as a lawyer, she should know she's potentially compromised any legal proceedings that might be brought against Mr Assange if in fact he makes it to the US.
"I believe also she's shown a complete contempt for Australia's sovereignty - the way she has defaulted to the interests of the US, instinctively it seems, rather than the interests of an Australian citizen."
Mr Wilkie says he is disgusted by Ms Gillard's response and her disregard for free speech.
Australian Government Makes Up Some Laws To Kill Free Speech And Protect Their Putrid Asses
Now you can see what scum these people really are. It's all out in the open.
From news.com.au
THE Federal Government has elaborated on its position on WikiLeaks, saying both the initial leaking of classified documents and their subsequent distribution by the controversial website is likely to be illegal.
"The unauthorised obtaining of the information may well be an offence,'' Attorney-General Robert McClelland said today.
"The distribution of that information I would think would have a solid argument, again without knowing the United States law, would be an offence.
"Certainly to release that sort of information by an officer of the commonwealth, if it were Australian material, would in my view certainly involve criminality.''
Mr McClelland was speaking in Sydney after launching a new guide for businesses entitled The Insider Threat to Business - A Personnel Security Handbook.
"It is clearly topical,'' Mr McClelland said.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard was on Monday unable to name any Australian laws broken by WikiLeaks or its founder Julian Assange, but claimed the ``foundation stone of it is an illegal act''.
There has been anger throughout the community that the Australian Government appeared to be pre-judging Mr Assange and the activities of WikiLeaks without any charge or trial.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
John Pilger SLAMS The Lies About War & Calls On Australians To Defend Julian Assange
From Max Keiser
Like everyone in the media these days, the woman interviewing John Pilger doesn't understand how the cables reveal lying. We really need to get rid of almost everyone in the government and in the media if things are going to get better. The cables expose a great deal of lying. If you have one face in public and one in secret, and conduct dubious activities to hide the truth, how is that not lying? Start from scratch with people who are capable of thought.
Like everyone in the media these days, the woman interviewing John Pilger doesn't understand how the cables reveal lying. We really need to get rid of almost everyone in the government and in the media if things are going to get better. The cables expose a great deal of lying. If you have one face in public and one in secret, and conduct dubious activities to hide the truth, how is that not lying? Start from scratch with people who are capable of thought.
Western Civilization Has Shed Its Values
Here is just a small portion of the article by Paul Craig Roberts on Infowars. I suggest reading the whole thing at the Infowar link below.
From Infowars.
As the cables leaked by a patriotic American to WikiLeaks reveal, the U.S. government was even able to prevent accountable government in the UK by having British prime minister Brown “fix” the official Chilcot Inquiry into the deceptions used by former prime minister Tony Blair to lead the British into serving as mercenaries in America’s wars. The U.S. was able to do this because the British prime minister does not believe in accountable government either.
The leaked documents show that the last thing the U.S. government wants anywhere is a government that is accountable to its own citizens instead of to the U.S. government...
Perhaps the most discouraging development is the accusation that is being spread via the Internet that Julian Assange is a dupe or even a covert agent used by the CIA and Mossad to spread disinformation that furthers U.S. and Israeli agendas. This accusation might come from intelligence services striving to protect governments by discrediting the leaked information. However, it has gained traction because some of the cables contain false information. Some have concluded, incorrectly, that the false information was put into the documents for the purpose of being leaked.
There is another explanation for the false information. Diplomats concerned with advancing their careers learn to tell their bosses what they want to hear, whether true or false. Diplomats understand that the U.S. government has agendas that it cannot declare and that they are expected to support these agendas by sending in reports that validate the undeclared agendas. For example, the U.S. government cannot openly say that it is endeavoring to create a climate of opinion that gives the U.S. a green light for eliminating the independent Iranian government and re-establishing an American puppet state. U.S. “diplomats,” a.k.a. spies, understand this and fabricate the information that supports the agenda...
In my opinion, the most important of all the cables leaked is the secret directive sent by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to 33 U.S. embassies and consulates ordering U.S. diplomats to provide credit card numbers, email addresses, phone, fax and pager numbers, frequent-flyer account numbers, and biographic and biometric information including DNA information on U.N. officials from the secretary-general down, including “heads of peace operations and political field missions.”
The directive has been characterized as the spy directive, but this is an unusual kind of spying. Usually, spying focuses on what other governments think, how they are likely to vote on U.S. initiatives, who can be bribed, and on sexual affairs that could be used to blackmail acquiescence to U.S. agendas.
In contrast, the information requested in the secret directive is the kind of information that would be used to steal a person’s identity.
Why does the U.S. government want information that would enable it to steal the identities of U.N. officials and impersonate them?
From Infowars.
As the cables leaked by a patriotic American to WikiLeaks reveal, the U.S. government was even able to prevent accountable government in the UK by having British prime minister Brown “fix” the official Chilcot Inquiry into the deceptions used by former prime minister Tony Blair to lead the British into serving as mercenaries in America’s wars. The U.S. was able to do this because the British prime minister does not believe in accountable government either.
The leaked documents show that the last thing the U.S. government wants anywhere is a government that is accountable to its own citizens instead of to the U.S. government...
Perhaps the most discouraging development is the accusation that is being spread via the Internet that Julian Assange is a dupe or even a covert agent used by the CIA and Mossad to spread disinformation that furthers U.S. and Israeli agendas. This accusation might come from intelligence services striving to protect governments by discrediting the leaked information. However, it has gained traction because some of the cables contain false information. Some have concluded, incorrectly, that the false information was put into the documents for the purpose of being leaked.
There is another explanation for the false information. Diplomats concerned with advancing their careers learn to tell their bosses what they want to hear, whether true or false. Diplomats understand that the U.S. government has agendas that it cannot declare and that they are expected to support these agendas by sending in reports that validate the undeclared agendas. For example, the U.S. government cannot openly say that it is endeavoring to create a climate of opinion that gives the U.S. a green light for eliminating the independent Iranian government and re-establishing an American puppet state. U.S. “diplomats,” a.k.a. spies, understand this and fabricate the information that supports the agenda...
In my opinion, the most important of all the cables leaked is the secret directive sent by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to 33 U.S. embassies and consulates ordering U.S. diplomats to provide credit card numbers, email addresses, phone, fax and pager numbers, frequent-flyer account numbers, and biographic and biometric information including DNA information on U.N. officials from the secretary-general down, including “heads of peace operations and political field missions.”
The directive has been characterized as the spy directive, but this is an unusual kind of spying. Usually, spying focuses on what other governments think, how they are likely to vote on U.S. initiatives, who can be bribed, and on sexual affairs that could be used to blackmail acquiescence to U.S. agendas.
In contrast, the information requested in the secret directive is the kind of information that would be used to steal a person’s identity.
Why does the U.S. government want information that would enable it to steal the identities of U.N. officials and impersonate them?
Just Released: Julian Assange Op-Ed In The Australian
From Zerohedge and The Australian.
WIKILEAKS deserves protection, not threats and attacks.
IN 1958 a young Rupert Murdoch, then owner and editor of Adelaide's The News, wrote: "In the race between secrecy and truth, it seems inevitable that truth will always win."
His observation perhaps reflected his father Keith Murdoch's expose that Australian troops were being needlessly sacrificed by incompetent British commanders on the shores of Gallipoli. The British tried to shut him up but Keith Murdoch would not be silenced and his efforts led to the termination of the disastrous Gallipoli campaign.
Nearly a century later, WikiLeaks is also fearlessly publishing facts that need to be made public.
I grew up in a Queensland country town where people spoke their minds bluntly. They distrusted big government as something that could be corrupted if not watched carefully. The dark days of corruption in the Queensland government before the Fitzgerald inquiry are testimony to what happens when the politicians gag the media from reporting the truth.
These things have stayed with me. WikiLeaks was created around these core values. The idea, conceived in Australia, was to use internet technologies in new ways to report the truth.
WikiLeaks coined a new type of journalism: scientific journalism. We work with other media outlets to bring people the news, but also to prove it is true. Scientific journalism allows you to read a news story, then to click online to see the original document it is based on. That way you can judge for yourself: Is the story true? Did the journalist report it accurately?
Democratic societies need a strong media and WikiLeaks is part of that media. The media helps keep government honest. WikiLeaks has revealed some hard truths about the Iraq and Afghan wars, and broken stories about corporate corruption.
People have said I am anti-war: for the record, I am not. Sometimes nations need to go to war, and there are just wars. But there is nothing more wrong than a government lying to its people about those wars, then asking these same citizens to put their lives and their taxes on the line for those lies. If a war is justified, then tell the truth and the people will decide whether to support it.
If you have read any of the Afghan or Iraq war logs, any of the US embassy cables or any of the stories about the things WikiLeaks has reported, consider how important it is for all media to be able to report these things freely.
WikiLeaks is not the only publisher of the US embassy cables. Other media outlets, including Britain's The Guardian, The New York Times, El Pais in Spain and Der Spiegel in Germany have published the same redacted cables.
Yet it is WikiLeaks, as the co-ordinator of these other groups, that has copped the most vicious attacks and accusations from the US government and its acolytes. I have been accused of treason, even though I am an Australian, not a US, citizen. There have been dozens of serious calls in the US for me to be "taken out" by US special forces. Sarah Palin says I should be "hunted down like Osama bin Laden", a Republican bill sits before the US Senate seeking to have me declared a "transnational threat" and disposed of accordingly. An adviser to the Canadian Prime Minister's office has called on national television for me to be assassinated. An American blogger has called for my 20-year-old son, here in Australia, to be kidnapped and harmed for no other reason than to get at me.
And Australians should observe with no pride the disgraceful pandering to these sentiments by Julia Gillard and her government. The powers of the Australian government appear to be fully at the disposal of the US as to whether to cancel my Australian passport, or to spy on or harass WikiLeaks supporters. The Australian Attorney-General is doing everything he can to help a US investigation clearly directed at framing Australian citizens and shipping them to the US.
Prime Minister Gillard and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have not had a word of criticism for the other media organisations. That is because The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel are old and large, while WikiLeaks is as yet young and small.
We are the underdogs. The Gillard government is trying to shoot the messenger because it doesn't want the truth revealed, including information about its own diplomatic and political dealings.
Has there been any response from the Australian government to the numerous public threats of violence against me and other WikiLeaks personnel? One might have thought an Australian prime minister would be defending her citizens against such things, but there have only been wholly unsubstantiated claims of illegality. The Prime Minister and especially the Attorney-General are meant to carry out their duties with dignity and above the fray. Rest assured, these two mean to save their own skins. They will not.
Every time WikiLeaks publishes the truth about abuses committed by US agencies, Australian politicians chant a provably false chorus with the State Department: "You'll risk lives! National security! You'll endanger troops!" Then they say there is nothing of importance in what WikiLeaks publishes. It can't be both. Which is it?
It is neither. WikiLeaks has a four-year publishing history. During that time we have changed whole governments, but not a single person, as far as anyone is aware, has been harmed. But the US, with Australian government connivance, has killed thousands in the past few months alone.
US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates admitted in a letter to the US congress that no sensitive intelligence sources or methods had been compromised by the Afghan war logs disclosure. The Pentagon stated there was no evidence the WikiLeaks reports had led to anyone being harmed in Afghanistan. NATO in Kabul told CNN it couldn't find a single person who needed protecting. The Australian Department of Defence said the same. No Australian troops or sources have been hurt by anything we have published.
But our publications have been far from unimportant. The US diplomatic cables reveal some startling facts:
► The US asked its diplomats to steal personal human material and information from UN officials and human rights groups, including DNA, fingerprints, iris scans, credit card numbers, internet passwords and ID photos, in violation of international treaties. Presumably Australian UN diplomats may be targeted, too.
► King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia asked the US to attack Iran.
► Officials in Jordan and Bahrain want Iran's nuclear program stopped by any means available.
► Britain's Iraq inquiry was fixed to protect "US interests".
► Sweden is a covert member of NATO and US intelligence sharing is kept from parliament.
► The US is playing hardball to get other countries to take freed detainees from Guantanamo Bay. Barack Obama agreed to meet the Slovenian President only if Slovenia took a prisoner. Our Pacific neighbour Kiribati was offered millions of dollars to accept detainees.
In its landmark ruling in the Pentagon Papers case, the US Supreme Court said "only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government". The swirling storm around WikiLeaks today reinforces the need to defend the right of all media to reveal the truth.
Julian Assange is the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.
WIKILEAKS deserves protection, not threats and attacks.
IN 1958 a young Rupert Murdoch, then owner and editor of Adelaide's The News, wrote: "In the race between secrecy and truth, it seems inevitable that truth will always win."
His observation perhaps reflected his father Keith Murdoch's expose that Australian troops were being needlessly sacrificed by incompetent British commanders on the shores of Gallipoli. The British tried to shut him up but Keith Murdoch would not be silenced and his efforts led to the termination of the disastrous Gallipoli campaign.
Nearly a century later, WikiLeaks is also fearlessly publishing facts that need to be made public.
I grew up in a Queensland country town where people spoke their minds bluntly. They distrusted big government as something that could be corrupted if not watched carefully. The dark days of corruption in the Queensland government before the Fitzgerald inquiry are testimony to what happens when the politicians gag the media from reporting the truth.
These things have stayed with me. WikiLeaks was created around these core values. The idea, conceived in Australia, was to use internet technologies in new ways to report the truth.
WikiLeaks coined a new type of journalism: scientific journalism. We work with other media outlets to bring people the news, but also to prove it is true. Scientific journalism allows you to read a news story, then to click online to see the original document it is based on. That way you can judge for yourself: Is the story true? Did the journalist report it accurately?
Democratic societies need a strong media and WikiLeaks is part of that media. The media helps keep government honest. WikiLeaks has revealed some hard truths about the Iraq and Afghan wars, and broken stories about corporate corruption.
People have said I am anti-war: for the record, I am not. Sometimes nations need to go to war, and there are just wars. But there is nothing more wrong than a government lying to its people about those wars, then asking these same citizens to put their lives and their taxes on the line for those lies. If a war is justified, then tell the truth and the people will decide whether to support it.
If you have read any of the Afghan or Iraq war logs, any of the US embassy cables or any of the stories about the things WikiLeaks has reported, consider how important it is for all media to be able to report these things freely.
WikiLeaks is not the only publisher of the US embassy cables. Other media outlets, including Britain's The Guardian, The New York Times, El Pais in Spain and Der Spiegel in Germany have published the same redacted cables.
Yet it is WikiLeaks, as the co-ordinator of these other groups, that has copped the most vicious attacks and accusations from the US government and its acolytes. I have been accused of treason, even though I am an Australian, not a US, citizen. There have been dozens of serious calls in the US for me to be "taken out" by US special forces. Sarah Palin says I should be "hunted down like Osama bin Laden", a Republican bill sits before the US Senate seeking to have me declared a "transnational threat" and disposed of accordingly. An adviser to the Canadian Prime Minister's office has called on national television for me to be assassinated. An American blogger has called for my 20-year-old son, here in Australia, to be kidnapped and harmed for no other reason than to get at me.
And Australians should observe with no pride the disgraceful pandering to these sentiments by Julia Gillard and her government. The powers of the Australian government appear to be fully at the disposal of the US as to whether to cancel my Australian passport, or to spy on or harass WikiLeaks supporters. The Australian Attorney-General is doing everything he can to help a US investigation clearly directed at framing Australian citizens and shipping them to the US.
Prime Minister Gillard and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have not had a word of criticism for the other media organisations. That is because The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel are old and large, while WikiLeaks is as yet young and small.
We are the underdogs. The Gillard government is trying to shoot the messenger because it doesn't want the truth revealed, including information about its own diplomatic and political dealings.
Has there been any response from the Australian government to the numerous public threats of violence against me and other WikiLeaks personnel? One might have thought an Australian prime minister would be defending her citizens against such things, but there have only been wholly unsubstantiated claims of illegality. The Prime Minister and especially the Attorney-General are meant to carry out their duties with dignity and above the fray. Rest assured, these two mean to save their own skins. They will not.
Every time WikiLeaks publishes the truth about abuses committed by US agencies, Australian politicians chant a provably false chorus with the State Department: "You'll risk lives! National security! You'll endanger troops!" Then they say there is nothing of importance in what WikiLeaks publishes. It can't be both. Which is it?
It is neither. WikiLeaks has a four-year publishing history. During that time we have changed whole governments, but not a single person, as far as anyone is aware, has been harmed. But the US, with Australian government connivance, has killed thousands in the past few months alone.
US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates admitted in a letter to the US congress that no sensitive intelligence sources or methods had been compromised by the Afghan war logs disclosure. The Pentagon stated there was no evidence the WikiLeaks reports had led to anyone being harmed in Afghanistan. NATO in Kabul told CNN it couldn't find a single person who needed protecting. The Australian Department of Defence said the same. No Australian troops or sources have been hurt by anything we have published.
But our publications have been far from unimportant. The US diplomatic cables reveal some startling facts:
► The US asked its diplomats to steal personal human material and information from UN officials and human rights groups, including DNA, fingerprints, iris scans, credit card numbers, internet passwords and ID photos, in violation of international treaties. Presumably Australian UN diplomats may be targeted, too.
► King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia asked the US to attack Iran.
► Officials in Jordan and Bahrain want Iran's nuclear program stopped by any means available.
► Britain's Iraq inquiry was fixed to protect "US interests".
► Sweden is a covert member of NATO and US intelligence sharing is kept from parliament.
► The US is playing hardball to get other countries to take freed detainees from Guantanamo Bay. Barack Obama agreed to meet the Slovenian President only if Slovenia took a prisoner. Our Pacific neighbour Kiribati was offered millions of dollars to accept detainees.
In its landmark ruling in the Pentagon Papers case, the US Supreme Court said "only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government". The swirling storm around WikiLeaks today reinforces the need to defend the right of all media to reveal the truth.
Julian Assange is the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.
Wikileaks: Vladimir Putin warns USA to stay out of Russian internal affairs
Oh not so a nothing these little cables are. By the way Gates you moron, you're description of Russia as "no longer a democracy" and "run by the security services." Hey...does that remind you of something? Like maybe the current form of the USA which you helped set up you traitor?
From The Telegraph.
A US diplomat's description of him as 'Batman' and Mr Medvedev as 'Robin' clearly meant to infer that Mr Putin is the more powerful half of Russia's ruling tandem obviously rankled in particular.
"(This was) aimed at slandering one of us," Mr Putin said without humour.
"This is about our interaction which is an important factor for domestic politics. To be honest with you, we did not suspect that this (criticism) could be made with such arrogance with such rudeness, and you know, so unethically."
Though he insisted it was not a threat, Mr Putin reinforced a warning from Mr Medvedev on Tuesday that the West should be sure to treat Russia as an equal partner when it came to designing and operating a new missile defence shield...
The strongest US criticism came from Mr Gates, who told a French colleague that "Russian democracy has disappeared" and that the country had become "an oligarchy run by the security services."
From The Telegraph.
A US diplomat's description of him as 'Batman' and Mr Medvedev as 'Robin' clearly meant to infer that Mr Putin is the more powerful half of Russia's ruling tandem obviously rankled in particular.
"(This was) aimed at slandering one of us," Mr Putin said without humour.
"This is about our interaction which is an important factor for domestic politics. To be honest with you, we did not suspect that this (criticism) could be made with such arrogance with such rudeness, and you know, so unethically."
Though he insisted it was not a threat, Mr Putin reinforced a warning from Mr Medvedev on Tuesday that the West should be sure to treat Russia as an equal partner when it came to designing and operating a new missile defence shield...
The strongest US criticism came from Mr Gates, who told a French colleague that "Russian democracy has disappeared" and that the country had become "an oligarchy run by the security services."
WikiLeaks: Nato allies have secret plan for defending eastern Europe from Russia
Still stuck in the cold war, waving the flags and building the bombs.
From The Telegraph.
Nato allies have drawn up a secret plan for defending several eastern European countries in the event of aggression by Russia for the first time since the end of the Cold War, diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks disclose.
From The Telegraph.
Nato allies have drawn up a secret plan for defending several eastern European countries in the event of aggression by Russia for the first time since the end of the Cold War, diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks disclose.
Monday, December 6, 2010
Paul Craig Roberts Weighs In On Wikileaks: "The courageous blood of warriors runs through WikiLeaks’ veins."
From Counterpunch
What the Wiki-Saga Teaches Us
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
The reaction to WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange tells us all we need to know about the total corruption of our “modern” world, which in fact is a throwback to the Dark Ages.
Some member of the United States government released to WikiLeaks the documents that are now controversial. The documents are controversial, because they are official US documents and show all too clearly that the US government is a duplicitous entity whose raison d’etre is to control every other government.
The media, not merely in the US but also throughout the English speaking world and Europe, has shown its hostility to WikiLeaks. The reason is obvious. WikiLeaks reveals truth, while the media covers up for the US government and its puppet states.
Why would anyone with a lick of sense read the media when they can read original material from WikiLeaks? The average american reporter and editor must be very angry that his/her own cowardice is so clearly exposed by Julian Assange. The american media is a whore, whereas the courageous blood of warriors runs through WikiLeaks’ veins.
Just as american politicians want Bradley Manning executed because he revealed crimes of the US government, they want Julian Assange executed. In the past few days the more notorious of the dumbshits that sit in the US Congress have denounced Assange as a “traitor to america.” What total ignorance. Assange is an Australian, not an american citizen. To be a traitor to america, one has to be of the nationality. An Australilian cannot be a traitor to america any more than an american can be a traitor to Australia. But don’t expect the morons who represent the lobbyists to know this much.
Mike Huckabee, the redneck baptist preacher who was governor of arkansas and, to
america’s already overwhelming shame, was third runner up to the Republican presidential nomination, has called for Assange’s execution. So here we have a “man of God” calling for the US government to murder an Australian citizen. And americans wonder why the rest of the world hates their guts.
The material leaked from the US government to WikiLeaks shows that the US government is an extremely disreputable gang of gangsters. The US government was able to get British prime minister Brown to “fix” the official Chilcot Investigation into how former prime minister Tony Blair manipulated and lied the British government into being mercenaries for the US invasion of Iraq. One of the “diplomatic” cables released has UK Defense Ministry official Jon Day promising the United States government that prime minister Brown’s government has “put measures in place to protect your interests.”
Other cables show the US government threatening Spanish prime minister Zapatero, ordering him to stop his criticisms of the Iraq war or else. I mean, really, how dare these foreign governments to think that they are sovereign.
Not only foreign governments are under the US thumb. So is Amazon.com. Joe Lieberman from Connecticut, who is Israel’s most influential senator in the US Senate, delivered sufficiently credible threats to Amazon to cause the company to oust WikiLeaks content from their hosting service.
So there you have it. On the one hand the US government and the prostitute american media declare that there is nothing new in the hundreds of thousands of documents, yet on the other hand both pull out all stops to shut down WikiLeaks and its founder. Obviously, despite the US government’s denials, the documents are extremely damaging. The documents show that the US government is not what it pretends to be.
Assange is in hiding. He fears CIA and Mossad assassination, and to add to his troubles the government of Sweden has changed its mind, perhaps as a result of american persuasion and money, about sex charges that the Swedish government had previously dismissed for lack of credibility. If reports are correct, two women, who possibly could be CIA or Mossad assets, have brought sex charges against Assange. One claims that she was having consensual sexual intercourse with him, but that he didn’t stop when she asked him to when the condom broke.
Think about this for a minute. Other than male porn stars who are bored with it all, how many men can stop at the point of orgasm or when approaching orgasm? How does anyone know where Assange was in the process of the sex act?
Would a real government that had any integrity and commitment to truth try to blacken the name of the prime truth teller of our time on the basis of such flimsy charges?
Obviously, Sweden has become another two-bit punk puppet government of the US.
The US government has got away with telling lies for so long that it no longer hesitates to lie in the most blatant way. WikiLeaks released a US classified document signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that explicitly orders US diplomats to spy on UN Security council officials and on the Secretary General of the United Nations. The cable is now in the public record. No one challenges its authenticity. Yet, today the Obama regime, precisely White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, declared that Hillary had never ordered or even asked US officials to spy on UN officials.
As Antiwar.com asked: Who do you believe, the printed word with Hillary’s signature or the White House?
Anyone who believes the US government about anything is the epitome of gullibility.
Paul Craig Roberts was an editor of the Wall Street Journal and an Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury. His latest book, HOW THE ECONOMY WAS LOST, has just been published by CounterPunch/AK Press. He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com
What the Wiki-Saga Teaches Us
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
The reaction to WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange tells us all we need to know about the total corruption of our “modern” world, which in fact is a throwback to the Dark Ages.
Some member of the United States government released to WikiLeaks the documents that are now controversial. The documents are controversial, because they are official US documents and show all too clearly that the US government is a duplicitous entity whose raison d’etre is to control every other government.
The media, not merely in the US but also throughout the English speaking world and Europe, has shown its hostility to WikiLeaks. The reason is obvious. WikiLeaks reveals truth, while the media covers up for the US government and its puppet states.
Why would anyone with a lick of sense read the media when they can read original material from WikiLeaks? The average american reporter and editor must be very angry that his/her own cowardice is so clearly exposed by Julian Assange. The american media is a whore, whereas the courageous blood of warriors runs through WikiLeaks’ veins.
Just as american politicians want Bradley Manning executed because he revealed crimes of the US government, they want Julian Assange executed. In the past few days the more notorious of the dumbshits that sit in the US Congress have denounced Assange as a “traitor to america.” What total ignorance. Assange is an Australian, not an american citizen. To be a traitor to america, one has to be of the nationality. An Australilian cannot be a traitor to america any more than an american can be a traitor to Australia. But don’t expect the morons who represent the lobbyists to know this much.
Mike Huckabee, the redneck baptist preacher who was governor of arkansas and, to
america’s already overwhelming shame, was third runner up to the Republican presidential nomination, has called for Assange’s execution. So here we have a “man of God” calling for the US government to murder an Australian citizen. And americans wonder why the rest of the world hates their guts.
The material leaked from the US government to WikiLeaks shows that the US government is an extremely disreputable gang of gangsters. The US government was able to get British prime minister Brown to “fix” the official Chilcot Investigation into how former prime minister Tony Blair manipulated and lied the British government into being mercenaries for the US invasion of Iraq. One of the “diplomatic” cables released has UK Defense Ministry official Jon Day promising the United States government that prime minister Brown’s government has “put measures in place to protect your interests.”
Other cables show the US government threatening Spanish prime minister Zapatero, ordering him to stop his criticisms of the Iraq war or else. I mean, really, how dare these foreign governments to think that they are sovereign.
Not only foreign governments are under the US thumb. So is Amazon.com. Joe Lieberman from Connecticut, who is Israel’s most influential senator in the US Senate, delivered sufficiently credible threats to Amazon to cause the company to oust WikiLeaks content from their hosting service.
So there you have it. On the one hand the US government and the prostitute american media declare that there is nothing new in the hundreds of thousands of documents, yet on the other hand both pull out all stops to shut down WikiLeaks and its founder. Obviously, despite the US government’s denials, the documents are extremely damaging. The documents show that the US government is not what it pretends to be.
Assange is in hiding. He fears CIA and Mossad assassination, and to add to his troubles the government of Sweden has changed its mind, perhaps as a result of american persuasion and money, about sex charges that the Swedish government had previously dismissed for lack of credibility. If reports are correct, two women, who possibly could be CIA or Mossad assets, have brought sex charges against Assange. One claims that she was having consensual sexual intercourse with him, but that he didn’t stop when she asked him to when the condom broke.
Think about this for a minute. Other than male porn stars who are bored with it all, how many men can stop at the point of orgasm or when approaching orgasm? How does anyone know where Assange was in the process of the sex act?
Would a real government that had any integrity and commitment to truth try to blacken the name of the prime truth teller of our time on the basis of such flimsy charges?
Obviously, Sweden has become another two-bit punk puppet government of the US.
The US government has got away with telling lies for so long that it no longer hesitates to lie in the most blatant way. WikiLeaks released a US classified document signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that explicitly orders US diplomats to spy on UN Security council officials and on the Secretary General of the United Nations. The cable is now in the public record. No one challenges its authenticity. Yet, today the Obama regime, precisely White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, declared that Hillary had never ordered or even asked US officials to spy on UN officials.
As Antiwar.com asked: Who do you believe, the printed word with Hillary’s signature or the White House?
Anyone who believes the US government about anything is the epitome of gullibility.
Paul Craig Roberts was an editor of the Wall Street Journal and an Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury. His latest book, HOW THE ECONOMY WAS LOST, has just been published by CounterPunch/AK Press. He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com
Saturday, December 4, 2010
A Brief Look at the Arguments Against Wikileaks...
What are the arguments against Wikileaks? I only know a few.
1. Wikileaks has blood on it's hands for endangering sources or collaborators with the US.
This has never been proven, and seems to be largely a Pentagon talking point used to sway opinion, having no basis in fact. People who collaborate and aid invading armies like the U.S. occupying force in Afghanistan and Iraq are of course always in danger. That the Taliban have read Wikileaks and then hunted down individuals has never been proven. If there were such cases, I'm sure the Pentagon would be jumping all over them. Assange has also pointed out that these people may not be so innocent as some pretend, since they are individuals who have decided to aid an occupying force for personal profit or other motive.
2. Wikileaks has hurt diplomacy, made it more difficult for the U.S. to do essential work like halting the spread of nuclear weapons.
If anyone had faith in our western governments, this might be a valid point. However their secrecy, corruption and dishonesty have turned them into unreliable partners for a just and democratic world. Just to use a famous example, the UK and the US conspired to fake intelligence and outright lie about WMDs in order to invade Iraq. On a personal basis, if we know someone to be a liar, we will want added transparency in our dealings with them. The same should go for governments. We cannot entrust them with such power until they rediscover the importance of principle and justice in their dealings.
You've lost my trust, now you have to lose your secrecy!
3. Assange is a Patsy and Wikileaks is a plot by Soros or the CIA to bring us to war, help Israeli concerns, or to shut down or censor the internet.
I haven't seen any strong evidence that points to this other then people who are completely convinced of it, without giving much proof. If there is evidence of some such thing, bring it out, let's have a look. I find it, as well, hard to believe that the document dumps are in the interest or serve somehow the agenda of the CIA or the larger military-industrial-financial complex. Of course any form of resistance can trigger a crackdown from the authorities, but does that make the resistance itself wrong? It might also be that the crackdown or increase in security will tax the energies of the military-industrial-financial complex and make them weaker and not stronger in the long run.
1. Wikileaks has blood on it's hands for endangering sources or collaborators with the US.
This has never been proven, and seems to be largely a Pentagon talking point used to sway opinion, having no basis in fact. People who collaborate and aid invading armies like the U.S. occupying force in Afghanistan and Iraq are of course always in danger. That the Taliban have read Wikileaks and then hunted down individuals has never been proven. If there were such cases, I'm sure the Pentagon would be jumping all over them. Assange has also pointed out that these people may not be so innocent as some pretend, since they are individuals who have decided to aid an occupying force for personal profit or other motive.
2. Wikileaks has hurt diplomacy, made it more difficult for the U.S. to do essential work like halting the spread of nuclear weapons.
If anyone had faith in our western governments, this might be a valid point. However their secrecy, corruption and dishonesty have turned them into unreliable partners for a just and democratic world. Just to use a famous example, the UK and the US conspired to fake intelligence and outright lie about WMDs in order to invade Iraq. On a personal basis, if we know someone to be a liar, we will want added transparency in our dealings with them. The same should go for governments. We cannot entrust them with such power until they rediscover the importance of principle and justice in their dealings.
You've lost my trust, now you have to lose your secrecy!
3. Assange is a Patsy and Wikileaks is a plot by Soros or the CIA to bring us to war, help Israeli concerns, or to shut down or censor the internet.
I haven't seen any strong evidence that points to this other then people who are completely convinced of it, without giving much proof. If there is evidence of some such thing, bring it out, let's have a look. I find it, as well, hard to believe that the document dumps are in the interest or serve somehow the agenda of the CIA or the larger military-industrial-financial complex. Of course any form of resistance can trigger a crackdown from the authorities, but does that make the resistance itself wrong? It might also be that the crackdown or increase in security will tax the energies of the military-industrial-financial complex and make them weaker and not stronger in the long run.
Ellsberg Boycotts Amazon
Down with the Amazon cowards and the Lieberman pig...
From Antiwar.com
Daniel Ellsberg Says Boycott Amazon
Daniel Ellsberg, December 02, 2010
Open letter to Amazon.com Customer Service:
December 2, 2010
I’m disgusted by Amazon’s cowardice and servility in abruptly terminating today its hosting of the Wikileaks website, in the face of threats from Senator Joe Lieberman and other Congressional right-wingers. I want no further association with any company that encourages legislative and executive officials to aspire to China’s control of information and deterrence of whistle-blowing.
For the last several years, I’ve been spending over $100 a month on new and used books from Amazon. That’s over. I ask Amazon to terminate immediately my membership in Amazon Prime and my Amazon credit card and account, to delete my contact and credit information from their files and to send me no more notices.
I understand that many other regular customers feel as I do and are responding the same way. Good: the broader and more immediate the boycott, the better. I hope that these others encourage their contact lists to do likewise and to let Amazon know exactly why they’re shifting their business. I’ve asked friends today to suggest alternatives, and I’ll be exploring service from Powell’s Books, Half-Price Books, Biblio and others.
So far Amazon has spared itself the further embarrassment of trying to explain its action openly. This would be a good time for Amazon insiders who know and perhaps can document the political pressures that were brought to bear–and the details of the hasty kowtowing by their bosses–to leak that information. They can send it to Wikileaks (now on servers outside the US), to mainstream journalists or bloggers, or perhaps to sites like antiwar.com that have now appropriately ended their book-purchasing association with Amazon.
Yours (no longer),
Daniel Ellsberg
From Antiwar.com
Daniel Ellsberg Says Boycott Amazon
Daniel Ellsberg, December 02, 2010
Open letter to Amazon.com Customer Service:
December 2, 2010
I’m disgusted by Amazon’s cowardice and servility in abruptly terminating today its hosting of the Wikileaks website, in the face of threats from Senator Joe Lieberman and other Congressional right-wingers. I want no further association with any company that encourages legislative and executive officials to aspire to China’s control of information and deterrence of whistle-blowing.
For the last several years, I’ve been spending over $100 a month on new and used books from Amazon. That’s over. I ask Amazon to terminate immediately my membership in Amazon Prime and my Amazon credit card and account, to delete my contact and credit information from their files and to send me no more notices.
I understand that many other regular customers feel as I do and are responding the same way. Good: the broader and more immediate the boycott, the better. I hope that these others encourage their contact lists to do likewise and to let Amazon know exactly why they’re shifting their business. I’ve asked friends today to suggest alternatives, and I’ll be exploring service from Powell’s Books, Half-Price Books, Biblio and others.
So far Amazon has spared itself the further embarrassment of trying to explain its action openly. This would be a good time for Amazon insiders who know and perhaps can document the political pressures that were brought to bear–and the details of the hasty kowtowing by their bosses–to leak that information. They can send it to Wikileaks (now on servers outside the US), to mainstream journalists or bloggers, or perhaps to sites like antiwar.com that have now appropriately ended their book-purchasing association with Amazon.
Yours (no longer),
Daniel Ellsberg
Friday, December 3, 2010
Assange: "History will win."
From The Guardian.
The Cable Gate archive has been spread, along with significant material from the US and other countries to over 100,000 people in encrypted form. If something happens to us, the key parts will be released automatically. Further, the Cable Gate archives is in the hands of multiple news organisations. History will win. The world will be elevated to a better place. Will we survive? That depends on you.
The Cable Gate archive has been spread, along with significant material from the US and other countries to over 100,000 people in encrypted form. If something happens to us, the key parts will be released automatically. Further, the Cable Gate archives is in the hands of multiple news organisations. History will win. The world will be elevated to a better place. Will we survive? That depends on you.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
WikiLeaks cables: CIA drew up UN spying wishlist for diplomats
From The Guardian.
The US state department's wishlist of information about the United Nations secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, and other senior members of his organisation was drawn up by the CIA, the Guardian has learned.
The US state department's wishlist of information about the United Nations secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, and other senior members of his organisation was drawn up by the CIA, the Guardian has learned.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Wikileaks Is Targeting a Major US Bank
From CNBC.
While the leaked diplomatic cables published this week by Wikileaks have been roiling the global political scene, bank executives should be on guard. Wikileaks founder Julian Assange just announced that he has a trove of documents revealing unethical behavior at one of the largest banks in the US.
In an interview with Forbes, Assange declined to name the bank. But he hinted at it's identity. It is one of the biggest banks in the country. It still exists—ruling out Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch or Lehman Brothers.
That leaves us with a handful of candidates: Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs.
Assange says he has tens of thousands of documents showing an "ecosystem of corruption." The publication will prompt investigations and reforms, according to Assange.
I also recommend reading the full interview with Assange in Forbes.
While the leaked diplomatic cables published this week by Wikileaks have been roiling the global political scene, bank executives should be on guard. Wikileaks founder Julian Assange just announced that he has a trove of documents revealing unethical behavior at one of the largest banks in the US.
In an interview with Forbes, Assange declined to name the bank. But he hinted at it's identity. It is one of the biggest banks in the country. It still exists—ruling out Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch or Lehman Brothers.
That leaves us with a handful of candidates: Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs.
Assange says he has tens of thousands of documents showing an "ecosystem of corruption." The publication will prompt investigations and reforms, according to Assange.
I also recommend reading the full interview with Assange in Forbes.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Der Spiegel: For U.S. Leaked Cables are "no less than a political meltdown."
From Spiegel Online.
The leak of over 250,000 American diplomatic cables could prove highly embarrassing for the US State Department. The documents reveal what US diplomats really think of other countries, and their worldview is incredibly dark at times. Relations with several countries are likely to suffer as a result.
The leak of over 250,000 American diplomatic cables could prove highly embarrassing for the US State Department. The documents reveal what US diplomats really think of other countries, and their worldview is incredibly dark at times. Relations with several countries are likely to suffer as a result.
US diplomats asked to spy: WikiLeaks
From AFP.
WASHINGTON — The United States has ordered its diplomats to play a larger intelligence role by performing espionage work like obtaining the credit card and frequent flyer numbers of foreign dignitaries, according to leaked US documents published Sunday.
Secret cables -- leaked by the whistleblower website WikiLeaks and published in newspapers including the New York Times and The Guardian in Britain -- reveal that US State Department personnel are asked to glean highly personal information from UN officials and key players from countries around the world.
The cables alluding to work usually associated with the Central Intelligence Agency and other spy bodies were sent to embassies in Africa, the Middle East, eastern Europe, Latin America and the US mission to the United Nations.
For example, a classified directive sent to US diplomats under US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's name in July last year sought technical details about the communications systems used by top UN officials, The Guardian said.
These included passwords and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks for official communications, it reported.
The New York Times said that one cable signed by Clinton sought "biographic and biometric information on ranking North Korean diplomats" from US diplomats at the US mission to the United Nations in New York.
The Guardian said the directive also sought intelligence on UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's "management and decision-making style and his influence on the secretariat."
Washington also asked for credit card numbers, email addresses, phone, fax and pager numbers and even frequent-flyer account numbers for UN officials, the British daily added...
WASHINGTON — The United States has ordered its diplomats to play a larger intelligence role by performing espionage work like obtaining the credit card and frequent flyer numbers of foreign dignitaries, according to leaked US documents published Sunday.
Secret cables -- leaked by the whistleblower website WikiLeaks and published in newspapers including the New York Times and The Guardian in Britain -- reveal that US State Department personnel are asked to glean highly personal information from UN officials and key players from countries around the world.
The cables alluding to work usually associated with the Central Intelligence Agency and other spy bodies were sent to embassies in Africa, the Middle East, eastern Europe, Latin America and the US mission to the United Nations.
For example, a classified directive sent to US diplomats under US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's name in July last year sought technical details about the communications systems used by top UN officials, The Guardian said.
These included passwords and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks for official communications, it reported.
The New York Times said that one cable signed by Clinton sought "biographic and biometric information on ranking North Korean diplomats" from US diplomats at the US mission to the United Nations in New York.
The Guardian said the directive also sought intelligence on UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's "management and decision-making style and his influence on the secretariat."
Washington also asked for credit card numbers, email addresses, phone, fax and pager numbers and even frequent-flyer account numbers for UN officials, the British daily added...
Secret US Embassy Cables
The Wikileaks website is now showing the Secret US Embassy Cables with a search utility to sort through them. A good Sunday night activity.
From Wikileaks
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.
From Wikileaks
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.
US cables leak sparks global diplomatic crisis; Saudi Donors Main Financiers of Al-Qaeda
At least some of the Wikileaks cables are out.
From The Guardian.
Classified embassy dispatches reveal Saudi king pressed US for military action on Iran and Washington used diplomats to spy on UN
From The New York Times.
Saudi Donors remain the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like Al Qaeda
From The Guardian.
Classified embassy dispatches reveal Saudi king pressed US for military action on Iran and Washington used diplomats to spy on UN
From The New York Times.
Saudi Donors remain the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like Al Qaeda
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
