WikiLeaks Drop Shows U.S. Striving to Maintain Order in Chaotic Global Relations ... Some of the diplomatic papers stolen from the State Department and leaked Sunday by WikiLeaks show more than just potentially embarrassing revelations about U.S. views of allies but disturbing developments among alleged friends as well as foes and competitive states. The details from the cables being released among 250,000 illegally taken from secret State Department records include discussions on the U.S. being unable to stop Syrian arms to Hezbollah, its disappointment in Qatar to stop funding terrorism and hacking by the Chinese government of U.S. computers. Other communiques passed forward by the website to several newspapers also reveal U.S. talk about individual leaders like Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, who the Guardian reported was noted to be "accompanied everywhere by a 'voluptuous blonde' Ukrainian nurse." The Guardian also cites cables that call Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin an "alpha-dog," says Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai is "driven by paranoia" and describes German Chancellor Angela Merkel as one who "avoids risk and is rarely creative." The cables also suggest that the U.S. had sought to use its embassies in the global espionage network. FOX News
Dominant Social Theme: Julian Assange is a low-life, thieving sexual pervert who has placed US security at risk, endangered the lives of hardworking US bureaucrats, shown us what the Internet really is (a place good only for use by thieving, sexual perverts who want to put the hard-working men and women of the US State Dept at risk.) The Pentagon should immediately tighten its security, refuse further requests for information and draw up plans to bomb Iran.
Free-Market Analysis: Is Julian Assange the rebel-with-a-cause that he makes himself out to be? We gave him the benefit of the doubt for months, and still do, but with less and less certainty. We don't remember when our suspicions became more pronounced, but (credit where credit is due) the ever-sleuthing blogger and Bell feedbacker Lila Rajiva was there before us, believing for one reason or another that Assange was part of a larger disinformation campaign by the powers-that-be.
Now we are not willing to suggest this is a certainty (and maybe Ms. Rajiva is still not certain either.) But every time his WikiLeaks does another one of these data dumps, Assange takes another step backward in our view. Back in July after a massive WikiLeaks "dump" seemed to set a narrative that Pakistan was at fault for the Afghan war, we'd had enough and wrote a fictional narrative in which we imagined two CIA agents coming up with the idea for an Assange-like character. You can read our analysis here: Comes a Blond Stranger.
This latest effort by Assange raises even more doubts so far as we are concerned. First, there is the constant (annoying) advance dissemination of information to the likes of mainstream leftist publications such as the UK Guardian and Le Monde ... and previously to the New York Times. Anyone who believes that the New York Times (or the Guardian for that matter) is not in cahoots with the powers-that-be, has got to be terminally naοve in our opinion. That goes for Assange, too.
Does Assange, for all his apparent cynicism, not get it? He believes that the mainstream media is worth cultivating for his purposes? Apparently, he is fairly sure of their cooperation. Not that Assange puts it that way. There's plenty of information on the Internet about the way the world works. But rather than focus on the mercantilist intrigues of the Anglosphere, which uses the levers of government to advance its own private interests, Assange focuses attention on the government itself with his endless leaks of hundreds of thousands of low-level documents that are somehow "classified."
It's early days and much more is sure to emerge from this latest massive dissemination of raw, "secret" data, but from our point of view the Anglosphere, maybe, doesn't have much to worry about. (We could still be wrong.) Here's the narrative the COINTELPRO promotion (if that is what is) as we see it. Below we list the "news" as it pertains to the secret data that's been revealed and then the "result" which is often favorable to the Anglosphere and its "war on terror" in our humble view ...
Assange provides various mainstream publications with advance information so they can "break" their stories. RESULT: Wonderful anti-establishment credibility for failing mainstream pubs that are seen more and more as mouthpieces for the elite.
Information bluntly characterizes foreign leaders and often in a snide or patronizing manner. RESULT: This is terrible for the US diplomatic corp? To get their opinions on world leaders out in an open forum while the foreign leaders themselves have no way to respond? If it is a disinformation campaign, it's a brilliant one.
The US diplo corps is shown as pleading with allies for more responsibility and less support for terrorism. RESULT: A perception that the Americans seem to be fighting a valiant uphill battle. The world is encouraging terrorism and Foggy Bottom is doing its level best to protect the American people.
The Chinese are suspected of hacking US computers. RESULT: And how exactly is this a black eye from the Anglosphere's standpoint? The Chinese are "bad guys." This is a negative for the Anglo-American axis how exactly?
The US is using its embassies for spying. RESULT: The perception that the US is pulling out all the stops to keep its citizens safe from terrorism. Diplomacy is an ugly business, but the US is doing what it needs to do.
Iran seems to be winning in Iraq, and US diplo and military correspondence seems to indicate that. RESULT: Evidence accumulating that it will be necessary to bomb Iran. In fact, bomb now. Before its leaders can do more damage.
US allies like Saudi Arabia have been pleading with the US to take out Iran by any means necessary. RESULT: Evidence accumulating that even Islamic countries are alarmed by this crazy, out-of-control-nation Iran. Bomb Iran now! Before its leaders can do more damage.
The data being released by Assange is dangerous and his methodology is unforgivable. He is jeopardizing many lives. RESULT: The perception is increasingly clarified that the Internet is a dangerous instrument that must be brought under control so that people like Assange don't abuse it.
Who is this man, Assange? This blond stranger? His actions are questionable to say the least, and he may be a rapist as well, according to Swedish prosecutors ... RESULT: We begin to see that he is in fact quite obviously and evidently a sexual pervert. This is the sort of riffraff that the Internet attracts. Only a pervert would seek to do this kind of damage to the national security of the US. The Internet attracts perverts of this sort, that seek to use the Internet perversely, causing great damage to national security, embarrassing hard-working bureaucrats, making it difficult for soldiers to kill more Taliban and generally threatening the lives and reputations of those who have supported America's serial wars and quasi-genocidal campaigns at great risk to themselves ...
These revelations are simply out of control. The US intelligence agencies (all 16 of them) are seeking Assange and are constantly releasing "open letters" to Assange asking him to stop it. RESULT: Where is this massive and feared US intel operation? Where is the evidence of its fiercesome power all the renditions, all the torture. Doesn't seem so terrible after all. Paper tiger? Pussycat. Nothing to fear here. Heck, nothing to see.
These revelations must stop. The US government in particular has been very lax about security. But from now on the Pentagon in particular is simply not going to release much information pertaining to its operations at home and abroad. RESULT: Can those in leadership positions at the Pentagon be blamed for acting this way? Sure the Pentagon has been virtually transparent all these years, but now, well ... no more Mr. Nice Guy. The walls are going up. What we can't burn, we're gonna shred. And not a morsel is going to be provided to the press. Hey, what else can we do?
These are just some of the points that we have noticed the mainstream media making. The "results" are not being stated in so many words, but of course they don't have to be. The "data dump" speaks for itself. Of course in the days to follow, maybe we shall be proven wrong and there will be revelations that won't be "embarrassing" but that will actually prove detrimental to the US war-making effort, especially in Afghanistan. (Alternatively, there ARE such revelations, but the mainstream press is simply not covering them; this latter possibility makes certainty regarding WikiLeaks' role harder to define. We will be glad to write a followup article if we begin to believe our current analysis is incorrect, as we do believe the US has been waging unjustifiable wars, creating more enemies for the West and contributing to rising military tensions around the globe.)
Conclusion: But for now these leaks seem to: ridicule diplomats and leaders outside the US; show that the US is not an all-powerful global entity but a paper tiger that cannot even track down Assange; show that the Internet is being employed by perverts like Assange to ruin the credibility of the US and Foggy Bottom's ability to protect US citizens from harm; illustrate clearly a need to go to war with Iran; proffer evidence of China's perfidy in attacking US military/Internet facilities; make the point that US and European mainstream media organizations are "where the action is" when it comes to wholesale revelations of the US military-industrial complex. None of this is bad for the US as we see it, or Assange's intelligence handlers, if that is indeed what is going on.
Editor's Note: Regarding our use of the word "pervert" in this article. We have no idea if the charges against Assange are true. We believe him innocent until proven guilty. State monopoly justice, in which the state pays the prosecutor, the legislators, the judge and the penitentiary keepers means that it is almost impossible to get a fair trial in the West. Our use of the word was intended to show how the powers-that-be, in our view, are demonizing Assange (and the Internet) by smearing him sexually. it is an old trick and one the intelligence agencies inevitably use these days, to play on shame-based instincts, etc. We do not call Mr. Assange a pervert. Anyway, we would never use such language, and thus were putting the word in the mouths of others. it is disgusting and dehumanizing. The mainstream media, unfortunately, uses it all the time, especially in the US.
Further Note: Maybe, as a result of all these releases Assange will be proven to be a courageous and committed man. That would be our hope. Perhaps these releases will incite world opinion to turn more strongly against the US's serial wars and endless "collateral damage" (ongoing killings of women and children in various "theatres of war."). Yes, we wish fervently that the wars will end. They are manipulated wars in our opinion. The US needs to return to its founding Jeffersonian principles and reduce its 1,000 overseas military bases. The military industrial complex needs to be pared back. Will Assange actions help in this regard? That is what we are trying to determine as a publication devoted to tracking the promotion of the power elite and money power generallly. That is the reason for this article ...
http://www.thedailybell.com/1561/WikiLeaks-Clever-PsyOps.html
