Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby Ben D » Tue Nov 30, 2010 3:03 am

Bibi seems happy enough with the Wikileaks operation so far,....ahh but then he just happened to know before hand that this was bound to happen!

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/netanyahu-wikileaks-revelations-were-good-for-israel-1.327773
Netanyahu: WikiLeaks revelations were good for Israel

Published 01:41 30.11.10

"If leaders start saying openly what they have long been saying behind closed doors, we can make a real breakthrough on the road to peace."

Netanyahu added that Israel had worked in advance to limit any damage from leaks.

"Every Israeli leader has known for years that that dispatches are likely to leak out, so we adapted ourselves to the reality of leaks," he said. "That has a bearing on who I invite to meetings. No classified Israeli material was exposed by WikiLeaks."
There is That which was not born, nor created, nor evolved. If it were not so, there would never be any refuge from being born, or created, or evolving. That is the end of suffering. That is God**.

** or Nirvana, Allah, Brahman, Tao, etc...
User avatar
Ben D
 
Posts: 2005
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:10 pm
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby AlicetheKurious » Tue Nov 30, 2010 3:10 am

Bibi has such a big mouth, he's always dropping sly hints that let the cat out of the bag. I swear, he can't help himself.

Lucky for Israel the MSM contains the damage.
"If you're not careful the newspapers will have you hating the oppressed and loving the people doing the oppressing." - Malcolm X
User avatar
AlicetheKurious
 
Posts: 5348
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Egypt
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby Ben D » Tue Nov 30, 2010 3:19 am

Perhaps with his reputed 180 IQ, he feels he's on top of it all...
There is That which was not born, nor created, nor evolved. If it were not so, there would never be any refuge from being born, or created, or evolving. That is the end of suffering. That is God**.

** or Nirvana, Allah, Brahman, Tao, etc...
User avatar
Ben D
 
Posts: 2005
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:10 pm
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby AlicetheKurious » Tue Nov 30, 2010 6:18 am

Ben D wrote:Perhaps with his reputed 180 IQ, he feels he's on top of it all...


Yeah, "reputed". Imagine: Bibi is much smarter than Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking, whose IQ are both 160.

Whoever believes that, is probably about as smart as Netanyahu really is.
"If you're not careful the newspapers will have you hating the oppressed and loving the people doing the oppressing." - Malcolm X
User avatar
AlicetheKurious
 
Posts: 5348
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Egypt
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby Simulist » Tue Nov 30, 2010 2:33 pm

Project Willow wrote:I don't follow Dave Emory and don't know much about his work, and the blond link looks funny on the surface, but I thought I would paste this here.

http://spitfirelist.com/for-the-record/ftr-724-wiki-of-the-damned/

Intro­duc­tion: The first of two pro­grams deal­ing with Wik­iLeaks, this broad­cast exam­ines an intel­li­gence–con­nected mind con­trol cult with which Wik­iLeaks king­pin Julian Assange appears to be affil­i­ated. As well con­nected as it is ruth­less and crim­i­nal, the San­ti­nike­tan Park Asso­ci­a­tion of Anne Hamilton-Byrne con­di­tioned chil­dren with drugs, sen­sory depri­va­tion, sleep depri­va­tion, tor­ture and rit­ual sex­ual abuse in order to pro­duce sub­jects who bent to the will of the group’s leader.

Well. That's interesting.

(Especially if WikiLeaks is both real and a channel for disinformation.)
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby norton ash » Tue Nov 30, 2010 2:39 pm

San­ti­nike­tan Park Asso­ci­a­tion of Anne Hamilton-Byrne


Which can't help but make me think of Rhonda Byrne (The Secret) another spooky blonde Aussie. Will look at her bio.
Zen horse
User avatar
norton ash
 
Posts: 4067
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby JackRiddler » Tue Nov 30, 2010 2:45 pm

.

If Bibi had declared instead that this was a terrible disaster for Israel, several of you would be pointing out what a liar he is and spinning on to the exact same invincible conclusion that everything is going according to Israeli plan.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15988
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby Montag » Tue Nov 30, 2010 3:11 pm

Deadly Fictions: The classified diplomatic cables published by Wikileaks are the Pentagon Papers of the pro-Israel right
by Lee Smith

Nov 29, 2010
http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-polit ... -fictions/

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has positioned himself as a left-wing whistleblower whose life mission is to call the United States to task for the evil it has wreaked throughout the world. But after poring through the diplomatic cables revealed via the site yesterday, one might easily wonder if Assange isn’t instead a clandestine agent of Dick Cheney and Bibi Netanyahu; whether his muckraking website isn’t part of a Likudnik plot to provoke an attack on Iran; and if PFC Bradley Manning, who allegedly uploaded 250,000 classified documents to Wikileaks, is actually a Lee Harvey Oswald-like neocon patsy.

With all due apologies to Oliver Stone (and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran and Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey), what the Wikileaks documents reveal is not a conspiracy of any kind but a scary and growing gap between the private assessments of American diplomats and allies in the Middle East and public statements made by U.S. government officials. The publication of these leaked cables is eerily reminiscent of the Pentagon Papers, which exposed a decade-long attempt by U.S. officials to distort and conceal unpalatable truths about the Vietnam War, and manipulate public opinion. The difference is that while the Pentagon Papers substantially vindicated the American left, the Wikileaks cable dump vindicates the right.

Here are eight of the most obvious examples from the initial trove of documents that has appeared online:

1. While the Israelis are deeply concerned about Iran’s march toward a nuclear program, it is in fact the Arabs who are begging the United States to “take out” Iranian installations through military force, with one United Arab Emirates official even proposing a ground invasion. Calling Iran “evil,” King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia repeatedly urged the United States to “cut off the head of the snake” by attacking Iranian nuclear installations.

2. It is not just Israeli leaders who believe Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is reminiscent of Hitler; U.S. officials think so too, as do Arab leaders, who use the Hitler analogy to warn against the dangers of appeasing Iran.

3. North Korea, an isolated country that enjoys substantial diplomatic and economic backing from China, is supplying Iran with advanced ballistic missile systems that would allow an Iranian nuclear warhead to hit Tel Aviv—or Moscow—with a substantial degree of accuracy. Taken in concert with the North Korean-built nuclear reactor in Syria, it would appear that North Korea—acting with the knowledge and perhaps direct encouragement of China—is playing a significant and deliberate role in the proliferation of nuclear equipment and ballistic delivery systems in the Middle East.

4. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is not a model Middle Eastern leader who has found the right admixture of religious enthusiasm and democracy, as U.S. government officials often like to suggest in public, but “an exceptionally dangerous” Islamist. U.S. diplomats have concluded that Erdogan’s anti-Israel rhetoric is not premised on domestic Turkish electioneering or larger geo-strategic concerns but rather on a personal, visceral hatred of Israel.

5. Tehran has used the cover of the ostensibly independent Iranian Red Crescent—a member of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, whose pledge of neutrality allows it access to war zones—to smuggle weapons and members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ Qods Force into Lebanon during the 2006 Hezbollah-Israel war, and into Iraq, to fight against U.S. soldiers.

6. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and his intelligence chief Omar Suleiman are more worried about Hamas than about Israel and are staunchly opposed to the expansion of Iranian influence in the region.

7. The Amir of Qatar is a dubious ally, who plays Washington and Tehran off each other. “The Amir closed the meeting by offering that based on 30 years of experience with the Iranians, they will give you 100 words. Trust only one of the 100.”

8. America’s Arab allies do not believe that the Barack Obama Administration can separate Syria from Iran through any foreseeable combination of carrots and sticks. According to one cable, the UAE’s Sheik Mohamed Bin Zayed “showed no confidence that Syria could be separated from the Iranian camp” and quoted him directly as saying “If you want my opinion … I think not.” He advised that Syria would continue hedging on key regional issues (Iran, support for Hezbollah, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process) for the foreseeable future.

If these cables make many on the right look prescient, or at least in touch with reality, it is hardly a surprise that their domestic U.S. rivals are trying to spin the Wikileaks cables to their own advantage. For instance, leftwing academic specialists on the Middle East who have argued that the peace process is the key issue in the region and that the Gulf Arab states do not want the United States or Israel to bomb Iran are nonetheless celebrating the Wikileaks documents, even as their argument is now vitiated. Some university professors claim that their analysis is better than those of Washington’s Arab allies anyway. The New York Times is trying to make the case that in the wake of George W. Bush’s mismanagement the Obama Administration has managed to build a strong sanctions regime against Iran that includes Russia and China. Unfortunately, the cables prove only that Russian envoys are working to frustrate the U.S. effort by selling the Iranian position to the Arabs.

What comes through most strongly from the Wikileaks documents, however, is that U.S. Middle East policy is premised on a web of self-justifying fictions that are flatly contradicted by the assessments of American diplomats and allies in the region. Starting with Bush’s second term and continuing through the Obama Administration, Washington has ignored the strong and repeated pleas of its regional allies—from Jerusalem to Riyadh—to stop the Iranian nuclear program. Perhaps the most disturbing revelation in the documents is the extent to which both the Bush and Obama Administrations have concealed Iran’s war against the United States and its allies in Iraq, Lebanon, Israel, and the Arab Gulf states, even as those same allies have been candid in their diplomatic exchanges with us. U.S. servicemen and -women are being dispatched to combat zones in Iraq and Afghanistan where they are fighting Iranian soldiers and assets in a regional war with the Islamic Republic that our officials dare not discuss, lest they have to do something about it.

Members of the Washington policy establishment should be considerably less worried about how the foreign ministries of allied countries respond to the leaks than how the American electorate does. Even in a democracy, we accept that a key part of our diplomacy depends on concealing the truth, or even lying, in order to advance the interests of one’s own country. But it is hard to see how the public, mendacious, face of U.S. foreign policy, especially in the Middle East, serves American interests. By systematically misleading the American people, our policymakers have undermined the basis of our democracy, which is premised on the existence of a public that is capable of making informed decisions about a world that is only becoming more dangerous.
User avatar
Montag
 
Posts: 1259
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 4:32 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby JackRiddler » Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:03 pm

.

Lee Smith like others proceeds from an a priori conclusion that the answer is Israel, based on 1/1000 of the cables released so far, and blaming Wikileaks for the predictable spin of the corporate media.

I've rarely if ever quoted the following writer, but in this case have a reason to look past his usual hateful stuff about "Jew Control" and ZOG, in the hope of showing you something:

The Wikileaks doubters

Walt on Wikileaks:
". . . the big story in the early releases - at least as highlighted in the Times - seems to be the combination of the clear U.S. obsession with Iran and the fact that some Arab leaders expressed great concern about the prospect of an Iranian bomb. It was as predictable as the sun rising tomorrow that hard-line advocates of doing whatever it takes to stop an Iranian bomb would immediately seize upon the initial releases to buttress their case, but the documents don't actually support that conclusion. As Andrew Sullivan points out, the same people who routinely dismiss Arab calls for a different U.S. policy on the Israel-Palestinian peace process are now suddenly convinced that these same Arab leaders are pillars of wisdom. In any case, it is hardly a revelation to learn that some Gulf rulers would a) prefer a non-nuclear Iran, and b) would prefer it if the United States did the heavy lifting and bore the onus of taking care of this problem. It would be astonishing if they thought any other way.

But the crucial question all along has been how to address that issue, and here these releases show some ambivalence. There is hardly a consistent chorus of voices telling the United States to go ahead and bomb the place. Some leaders seem inclined in that way; others much less so. I've heard other senior Arab and Muslim officials say that it would be a calamity if we did."


Remember also that Arab rulers know that the United States is under full ZOG, and thus know that talking about an attack on Iran is what American diplomats will want to hear.

It is really not worth continuing to argue against the silly notion that Wikileaks is some kind of Zionist operation - a belief held by those who believe in controlled demolition but not in climate change! - but you should note the evidence of ZOG in the tone and content of the cables. American diplomats can slag Berlusconi, Putin, and even members of the British Royal Family, but even the slightest hint of criticism of the Jews, even in secret cables read only by other diplomats, would be the end of a career. The reason why Israel fares relatively well in the leaks is the bias in the original documents caused by ZOG.

"The (old) news from wikileaks so far – The US is Israel’s greatest enabler" American international diplomacy is the tail, Israel is the dog.

The Jew-controlled media is going to spin and lie. It is what they do. Note the stories that North Korea supplied Iran with long range missiles (ha!: "At the request of the Obama administration, the New York Times has agreed not to publish the text of the cable."), and the story that Iran uses the Red Crescent to smuggle spies and weapons into war zones ("according to a well-placed Iranian source who spoke to US diplomats"), both based on the completely unsubstantiated beliefs expressed in cables. Believe me, if Iran had missiles capable of hitting Europe, we would have heard about it! The constant lies of the Jew-controlled media can't be blamed on Wikileaks. Or, "the real danger of WikiLeaks’s otherwise important work: in the absence of intelligent and unbiased analysis, the material can be manipulated into war propaganda."

"Assange in the Entrails of Empire":

"On board the good ship Megaleaks, I leaf through the latest reports from the front line. There seem to be three main themes, all of which are centered on our plucky hero, Julian Assange. There is the “traitor” theme (which shrouds a globalist empire in patriotic colors), the “rapist” theme (in which a spurned lover is revenged upon our hero because he failed to produce a contraceptive device at the critical moment), and finally there is the “Zionist plot” theme (which is oddly tied up with the rape theme since one of his accusers has absconded to Israel). As in all well-designed disinformation campaigns, there is something for everyone: conservatives can jump on board with the traitor theme, liberals are fans of the rape theme, and the lunatic fringe can get excited about another Zionist plot. Let’s do our best to liberate the enslaved name of “Zion” from the apartheid state and restore it to where it belongs: the good ship Megaleaks and the spotlight of truth. It is simply too good a name to leave to Zionists."


and (the Swedes aren't even competent stooges!):

"The files reveal some brazen cases of interference. Many of the most recent are connected to Iran, which has become an obsession within the US leadership. For instance, just before the speech of President Ahmadinejad at the UN General Assembly, the State Department ordered the Europeans to leave the room at a certain cue. In fact, the European powers did jump to the US whistle that day, just as the obedient soviet satellites once leapt to Stalin’s tune. There was only one country that violated the order: Sweden. The terrified representative had accidentally missed the cue and frantically sent distressed signals to the Americans for further instruction."


at 11/30/2010 08:52:00 AM 2 Comments and 0 Reactions


From http://xymphora.blogspot.com, generally fucked up but has several brain cells working.

So here's your chance to tell us xymphora like Assange is just a Zionist false-front, 'cos those guys really play many levels of deception, which luckily are totally transparent to Gordon Duff and such. Xymphora's incessant "Jew Control" talk is just to get the cred to help spread Assange's secretly pro-Zionist propaganda, right? (Now couldn't that also be true of half the posters on this thread? OMG, we're all Zionist agents posing as anti-Zionists! I think I've seen this movie before!)

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15988
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby Simulist » Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:12 pm

JackRiddler wrote:From http://xymphora.blogspot.com, generally fucked up but has several brain cells working.

In my experience, that's the most dangerous sort of fucked-up person.

That said, I don't know for certain what WikiLeaks is — and I don't think anyone I've read or heard really does either. Sure, I can prove beyond a shadow of any doubt that I have suspicions. So can anybody. So what?

These days, if you're not suspicious about your own suspicions, you're probably not paying attention.
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby Montag » Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:13 pm

I'm just putting theories out there... I don't believe the Zionists control anything -- except Israel (they are one of the possible players behind Wikileaks). I mean the Israeli lobby seems to have undo influence for the number of Jews that there are in America, but I see a major part of the problem as gentiles who have drunk the Kool-aid that we must be in lockstep with Israel. If all the gentiles that support the "special relationship" with Israel could have their minds changed, then the Israel lobby would be far reduced in its power.
User avatar
Montag
 
Posts: 1259
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 4:32 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby Montag » Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:23 pm

WikiLeaks or WikiLies?
by Sergei Balmasov

November 30, 2010
http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas ... kileaks-0/

excerpt:
Online whistle blower WikiLeaks unveiled a new batch of compromising materials. This time correspondence of American diplomats was leaked, which clearly shows that the U.S. did not stop its subversive activities against other countries. The published papers can also adversely affect the relationship between certain countries. The main question is who benefits from it.

On November 28 online whistle blower WikiLeaks unveiled another portion of compromising materials. While earlier the website published documents about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, this time they made public secret correspondence of American diplomats. Most materials relate to the period of 2004 - 2010.

Most of them are recordings of conversations of American diplomats with foreign politicians, officials and individuals in different countries, as well as reports about the events in different countries and analysis of the situation. According to Der Spiegel, these documents are interesting precisely because diplomats and politicians did not expect them to be published and openly expressed their opinions. The psychological characteristics of foreign leaders devised by American diplomats are particularly of interest.

Russia Today: WikiLeaks expose the trust deficciency of US diplomacy

For example, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is compared to Hitler in U.S. diplomatic files, while German Chancellor Angela Merkel is called "risk averse and rarely creative." French President Nicolas Sarkozy was nicknamed "the emperor with no clothes."

Diplomats talked of Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi as "physically and politically weak" and "feckless." He is particularly disliked by the American diplomats for his friendship with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

In turn, the latter is called by American diplomats the "alpha male," "Batman" and "brutal politician." Dmitry Medvedev, in contrast, is called "pale and hesitant'' ''who plays Robin to his strongman Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's ''Batman.''

However, the greatest harm to the United States could be caused by making public methods of work of the American diplomats. Judging by the documents available in open access on WikiLeaks, Washington spied on UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, as well as the representatives of this international organization in Russia, China and other countries. Allegedly, the secretary of state Hillary Clinton gave an executive order to do so in July 2009.
User avatar
Montag
 
Posts: 1259
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 4:32 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby Montag » Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:26 pm

It's very difficult to tell, I think, if someone is a tool of a particular country or intelligence service, or just being played like a fiddle.
User avatar
Montag
 
Posts: 1259
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 4:32 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby Simulist » Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:34 pm

Montag wrote:It's very difficult to tell, I think, if someone is a tool of a particular country or intelligence service, or just being played like a fiddle.

If the intended objectives are met either way, is there really a significant difference?
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Questioning WikiLeaks Thread

Postby Montag » Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:36 pm

Simulist wrote:
If the intended objectives are met either way, is there really a significant difference?


That's true, it probably doesn't even matter.
User avatar
Montag
 
Posts: 1259
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 4:32 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests