In espionage, there are three basic means of penetrating and/or using a hostile organization to one’s advantage:

1)  Turning an employee through some means such as blackmail, sex, bribery or appeal to a psychological weakness such as working on someone’s conscience or ideology and convince them to become your organization’s asset (agent/traitor)

2)  Placing your own officer within the organization as an employee (spy)

3) Using psychology and disinformation to convince the organization’s staff to work to your advantage and/or commit acts against its own interests (false flag/sale)

Typically there would be each of these approaches assessed individually and in various combinations and/or variants when planning an operation. WikiLeaks would be vulnerable to this on several counts.

WikiLeaks ties to the Chaos Computer Club, an organization that has been the focus of multiple intelligence agency penetration for decades, not only national intelligence agencies, but particularly the closely related corporate intelligence agencies (staffed largely by national agency veterans.)

Case in point, when the Green Party in Germany had come into a position of possible governance in 2011, the Chaos Computer Club related Pirate Party had suddenly left the wings of the political stage to field candidates and siphoned away Greens support. The Pirates have shown no interest in subsequent overtures by the Greens and the result has been the entrenched political interests continued in power with the majority corporate favored personalities and policies remaining intact. This is a classic symptom of an organization (Chaos Computer Club/Pirate Party) manipulated by intelligence to act against its own purported interests and public interest.

When Chaos Computer Club member and former close Assange/WikiLeaks associate Daniel Domsheit-Berg left WikiLeaks, he claimed he took the key to WikiLeaks’ online submission platform with him. Since, the platform remained shut down. During this extended period, the risks to anyone submitting information to WikiLeaks are vastly increased for reasons of exposure to conventional forensics (DNA, finger prints, postmarks, surveillance cameras et cetera.) If you have to mail the information to a stationary P.O. Box per Assange’s suggestion [interview with the Independent], every postal service in the world is likely to red flag every piece of mail to that address for their respective intelligence agencies and/or law enforcement, depending on government structure.

ALL of these submissions are at risk of being tracked back to the source of the leak, particularly to anyone who’d leaked without espionage training and it is unlikely many well-intended whistle-blowers providing information to WikiLeaks would have that kind of training. Much of what had been sent must have been intercepted. On the other hand, information actually passed through is as likely as not, to be planted by spy services and here is why:

If a foreign intelligence agency wished to discredit a government such as the USA or elements within the USA and did not wish to be credited with the embarrassing disclosures it had developed, WikiLeaks is a perfect platform to launder any such information through. This pertains to Assange’s incredibly naïve position he does not care where or from who the documents came, so long as the documents are authentic.

This opens the door wide to construct a false or misleading picture by selective provision of information wherein a documents collection can be created as to be deliberately misleading or slanted. And insofar as information provided to WikiLeaks that may have been out and out falsified, intelligence agencies are the best in the world when it comes this phenomena.

A closely related risk is competing factions within a government using WikiLeaks to undermine each other with selective leaking. This easily could be the case with Bradley Manning having been profiled as vulnerable and set up to leak with a selective documents collection as bait. This could explain the Obama administration obsession with prosecuting leaks, to advert this possibility as much as possible, a pre-emptive shut down of the people who might be tempted and consequently manipulated or used as ‘mules’ particularly, in a political sense often more damaging than persons providing information via straightforward leaks. Put the fear of god into them and let Manning be the example. Additionally, any people who’d actually dupe a Manning-like personality into laundering leaks for them, could care less about that person’s fate and would holler as loudly as any, for a Manning personality’s prosecution. He/she would catch hell coming and going, from both sides.

In case of creating custom tailored documents collection, whether [my hypothetical proposed examples follow but in reality this is technique studied at the intelligence agencies everyday] by a foreign entity’s spy service or in a domestic competition, any case is closely studied in a sense of trade-offs. To be convincing, there must be an appearance of credibility and that requires sometimes shooting your own toe off, so to speak, to put a bullet in the brain of your adversary. In other words, you must sometimes include information pointing fault at the vested party to throw the bloodhounds off.

If you were to have a circumstance of a neo-con aligned CIA Special Activities Division or ‘national clandestine service’ [the USA most certainly does] that were the enemy of the Obama people, a figure such as Panetta as Director of Central Intelligence would have been a mere fig leaf in many respects, there is no Democratic White House will control the CIA Special Activities Division, it’s simply not reality. This Division has historically been a George H.W. Bush (employing Cuban exiles) fan club. Throw some recent past Republican dirt that will essentially change nothing, into embarrassing disclosures that mainly damages the incumbent administration and hand it off to WikiLeaks [laundered through a dupe that leaks for you] and viola! The neo-cons have better chance at the next term’s elections because the honest voter will be turned off to the Democrats dirt (both sides are in fact filthy, it is often-times extent of exposure will determine outcome in the ‘game’ of politics.) Another possible scenario would be MOSSAD acting to strengthen American neo-cons with pro-Israel platform.

And because the general public (and one presumes WikiLeaks) do not typically possess a professional counter-espionage program, and indeed the spy versus spy game is pretty well portrayed in a simplistic way by MAD Magazine, what you see will seldom reflect the covert reality.

In regards to the cables leaks, there is circumstantial evidence pointing to a domestic/internal political competition. The most glaring point here is, the CIA coming off unscathed despite the CIA and State Department are in effect [and in fact] Siamese twins. It defies human nature to expect people believing they were using a secure system would not have compromised at least some ongoing operation, at some noticeable level. It didn’t happen.

Reinforcing the preceding thought is the Iraq Field Reports. The error of omission in this case was glaring to this [yours truly] former military special operations intelligence professional. Field Reports would be prepared by a military unit’s operations non-commissioned officer in initial raw data format, prior to any judicial review process, typically for a military unit’s executive officer signature, prior to reports passed up the chain of command. In the present American military era, sources have developed statistic of staggering incidence of raped [by their colleagues] American women soldiers. For instance in 2010 alone, in the Department of Defense [conservative] estimate, there were 19,000 sexual assaults in the U.S. military. The rapes were not magically vanished from time the Iraq invasion commenced to the release of the Iraq Field Reports except that someone did not want them there. The rapes should have been noted by the reports in many cases whether or not charges were pursued. This sort of epidemic certainly should have leaped out if in fact the reports had been uncensored.

Highly exploitable by the best psychology intelligence agencies money can buy, Julian Assange’s narcissism is HUGE, for instance his claim he had a ‘thermonuclear insurance file’ with the most damaging revelations reserved for his personal safety, indicating a belief he is more valuable than the public he claims to serve. With his persecuted-savior complex, his inability to lead and his inability to keep a rigorous self-discipline, particularly relating to his womanizing, both the narcissism and the womanizing would be examined as plainly exploitable by spy services, whether to inflict damage on WikiLeaks, or to usurp or co-opt agenda. The bottom line here is, were Assange given the benefit of the doubt as on the up and up, Assange’s lack of self-discipline none the less wrecked his position if only because he is far too narcissistic to comprehend the risk of the circumstance he’d created surrounding not only himself but everyone associated with WikiLeaks.

Another aspect is, it could serve a WikiLeaks invested intelligence agency to create an image of a persecuted Assange.

The Assange ‘back door’ extradition to to the USA via Sweden allegation smells bad, Britain has had a practically ‘no questions asked’ extradition treaty with the USA, employed to process and extradite to American courts. How would the ‘back door’ via Sweden allegation be explained in a context of the USA has not requested Assange’s extradition from the British? Assange also passed up his appeal option to the European Court and his own Swedish lawyer had stated Assange’s application for asylum “makes him look like a suspect.”

If the Swedish rape allegations were per chance politically motivated, the fact remains it is solely because of Assange’s lack of self-discipline and specifically his inability to keep his dick in his pants despite himself and his organization being high profile targets, WikiLeaks is now in the public purview as sheltering a rapist, whether real or imagined.

Given how Assange’s personality profiles, the chance these allegations are political persecution are only equal to the chance the allegations are valid. Whether in fact the rape occurred or not, present reality is the WikiLeaks mission statement would be better served with Assange out of the picture.

WikiLeaks has a LONG WAYS TO GO to insure even the most basic standard for protection from penetration, co-option and manipulation by the several competing interests involving spy agencies. That is, if WikiLeaks had not been a professional spy agency information operation from inception, which cannot be ruled out.

Related: The Arab Spring, A Modern Fable

Notes: my articles at this site that are not specific to WikiLeaks, are nearly entirely devoid of primary material developed by WikiLeaks and Julian Assange. I say nearly, because some secondary linked articles may have incidental references. The materials developed by Assange & company do not come even close to developing an accurate picture of the organized crime in corporate fusion with government such as are proposed in my assessment (series) America’s Deep State. Additionally, some of the WikiLeaks ‘scoops’ most widely publicized are in fact old and warmed over news; examples are the Haiti Sweat Shop exploitation story had been broken years previous but without receiving wide press and the American embassy pressure on Spanish courts over Judge Garzon had been published in El Pais a full year before it was sensationalized by the so-called ‘cables’ release. The materials in WikiLeaks ‘revelations’ at best provide a fractured, unfocused and chaotic distraction away from any clear view of the organized nature behind the criminal elements driving policy, and at worst, are meant to do exactly that-

Moreover, having spent years exploring the ‘underbelly’ of geopolitics, I can personally assure you that when Julian Assange insists he’s a target for assassination (or when Daniel Ellsberg insists the same), it’s a lot of patent bullshit. If the several intelligence agencies had wanted Assange out of the picture, without specialized training there is no indication Assange has, and exceptional luck on top of that, he’d have been dead long before he took refuge in the Ecuadoran embassy. The very fact Assange is alive indicates he is more valuable to the intelligence agencies alive than dead. It really is that simple.



Above Top Secret How (not) To Leak

Evil Cynics, Stooges & Dupes on Assange undermining the work of Glenn Greenwald

For an interesting assessment of a possible Obama administration motivation for a deliberate ‘war diaries’ leak, use this link


Deep State I Foundation article

Deep State II FBI complicity

Deep State III CIA narcotics trafficking

Deep State IV NATO & Gladio

Deep State V Economics & counter-insurgency

The Alpha Chronology my narrative as Deep State survivor