Archives for posts with tag: Julian Assange

16 September 2017 updated article HERE

 

The entire sand-castle (a product of Obama CIA Director John Brennan’s imagination) the “Russians hacked the election” is finally washing away with an incoming tide. How this plays out is anyone’s guess.

The open question is, how the new information will be leveraged, if it were to actually break into the open widely, with the bad boy Trump essentially captured by the surreal evil that surrounds him. Other than pure evil (e.g. Pence), only a narcissist or a fool would ever desire to be president of this particular republic. In ‘The Donald’, we have both.

1 August 2017 an audio tape is leaked in which Seymour Hersh states the FBI knows it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails:

“What the [FBI] report says is that some time in late Spring… he makes contact with WikiLeaks, that’s in his computer. Anyway, they found what he had done is that he had submitted a series of documents — of emails, of juicy emails, from the DNC” -Seymour Hersh

On 9 August 2017 The Nation magazine publishes a column on a group of independent experts…

“Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year”

…demonstrating the DNC mails were leaked, not hacked.

On 18 August 2017 Antiwar.com reports Congressman Dana  Rohrabacher has met with Assange concerning the DNC mails and [the article] further credibly suggests Assange is holding the DNC leak evidence hostage as a bargaining chip to possibly acquire a pardon for himself and leverage wikileaks into legitimacy with a President of the United States who at this point is owned by the USA’s intelligence agencies, a hare-brained scheme destined to fail. Assange & company waited too long.

But this would fit Julian Assange’s self-centered, persecuted-savior complex which never ceases to amaze, this guy (as well, Craig Murray) has allowed the idiots surrounding Trump to push us towards the brink with Russia, for months. All because Assange is tired of his embassy confinement in London, a circumstance that is entirely his own fault for the fact he didn’t have the self-discipline to keep his dick in his pants (whether Assange’s admitted intercourse was a case of rape or not.)

What’s more is, this blog pointed to strong circumstantial evidence it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails this past January, and recalling this, it still stretches the imagination a former UK ambassador would make an amateur espionage move worthy of a cub scout playing spy. But that’s what Craig Murray had done in the case of the DNC emails leaked to WikiLeaks.

Seymour Hersh states Seth Rich is the source of the DNC mails. Craig Murray states he had met with the source of the DNC mails. A + B = C:

Craig Murray met with Seth Rich

That Murray would be a high value target for American counter-intelligence to monitor for the reason of his high profile association with WikiLeaks is beyond obvious. For Murray then to state

murray_wikileaks-1

“I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things”

…goes to the practically bizarre when coming from a former United Kingdom ambassador to Uzbekistan. The UK is little different to the USA in the case of embassies providing cover for spies; in which case Murray should at least have some rudimentary espionage understanding such as YOU DO NOT MEET YOUR SOURCE DIRECTLY WHEN YOU ARE A HIGH PROFILE TARGET OF YOUR ADVERSARY’S COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE HUNTING YOUR (in this case, WikiLeaks) SOURCE(S)

Then, we had WikiLeak’s Assange giving what amounts to a ‘Glomar’ ‘I will neither confirm or deny’ response concerning the murder (assassination) of Seth Rich after appearing to suggest Rich was the source of the DNC emails leak:

Beyond this, WikiLeaks offering a $20,000 reward for the solving of the Seth Rich murder is laughable, that’s what an American west coast upscale community would offer for the arrest of a serial killer of the neighborhood’s cats. Two million dollars might get two seconds’ attention of a corruptible counter-intelligence agent with knowledge of a professional hit on Seth Rich, twenty million might even net an inside the agency sucker willing to take the exceedingly high risk to one’s life (almost certain death) that would attend selling out an agency hit man for substantial lucre. In truth, the WikiLeaks reward offer amounted to little more than a tabloid publicity stunt.

Narcissism is a blinding thing; and a self-righteous narcissism is no exception. Ambassador Murray could have every good intention but on the face of it, he had seriously screwed up. Murray and WikiLeaks should have immediately come clean, there was little to lose. Seth Rich was the source, Murray had met with him, and much could have been gained by stating so; there would be nothing given up any intelligence agency involved did not already know. It have been the right thing to do.

Craig Murray stating ‘I had a serious lapse of professional judgement and this resulted in the death of Seth Rich’ would be the most responsible and newsworthy move WikiLeaks could have taken; to counter the CIA’s ‘the Russians hacked the DNC’ propaganda lie, in which there is much invested by the agency; and the consequent damage to relations with Russia, and growing threat to what little world peace yet exists, is immense. WikiLeaks should have done the right thing a long time ago and they have not. Why not? Because Assange and WikiLeaks believes Assange’s comfort is more important than world peace. What fucks. This is beyond inexcusable, it’s criminal. But for Murray, there’s more at stake here than just a hit to ego & image.

Murray’s likely role in the DNC leaks case? A personal meeting with Rich to confirm for WikiLeaks Seth Rich was a bona fide insider with authentic material prior to a WikiLeaks cash payment to Rich and arrangements completed for the mails transfer.

Now, it is a question of ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t’ release the evidence because WikiLeaks waited too long, and let the criminals surrounding Trump consolidate their power while investing deeply in the myth of the Russians hacked the election; a criminal cabal that will up the ante on the world stage to any level necessary to avoid accountability. WikiLeaks Idiots. WikiLeaks Morons.

Meanwhile, Murray subsequently barred from the United States (except that he applies for a visa, typically unnecessary for a British citizen) appears to have been, in a  manner of speaking, a deep state message to Murray: ‘thank you very much for the lapse of judgement, we have taken full advantage with the assassination of Seth Rich and we won’t be requiring your services after this’ (he’d be smart to stay away.)

The really sticky problem for WikiLeaks in this scenario is, Seymour Hersh asserts in the  recorded call WikiLeaks had paid Rich for the leaked documents, damaging or reducing to element of pretense WikiLeaks claims of journalism & providing rationale for deep state prosecutors & judges to find this had been straightforward espionage. But they won’t do it if the Rich-Murray meeting stays buried, a LOT is invested in ‘the Russians did it’ for the public consumption. If it DOES break open, Murray’s ‘goose is cooked.’ It’s now not only WikiLeaks problem in a larger sense, but Murray’s, whether he does or doesn’t admit the assassinated Seth Rich had been the DNC mails source.

Murray’s reputation? C’est la mort.

*

Related:

Agent Assange

Litmus Test

WikiLeaks & Spy Agencies

 

MikiSpy

 ^ Micky Mossad

WikiLeaks has never been as simple as 2 + 2 = 4 or ‘it was leaked, WikiLeaks published it and the damage was done.’ Too often the intelligence math just doesn’t add up. There should be more than a healthy suspicion concerning WikiLeaks. Several assessments:

Assange’s Arrest  maximum security for life or CIA/MOSSAD caper?

Stickyleaks & Another Deceit

The Moron-o-Meter & Craig Murray

Kid Gloves (2)

From Behind: RollingStone Bends Its Readers Over

The Wheel is Indeed Empty

Incompetent Espionage & Wikileaks (IV)

Agent Assange

WikiLeaks & Spy Agencies

Incompetent Espionage & WikiLeaks

Litmus Test

The Arab Spring, A Modern Fable

“Assange … had MOSSAD connections” -Robert Steele, former CIA clandestine services officer

Related:

Something Stinks About Wikileaks by William Engdahl

Akamai Tree covering for the assassins of Seth Rich

Pentagon Papers, CIA and the Lies of Daniel Ellsberg

*

 

Expanded, updated article HERE

It stretches the imagination a former UK ambassador would make an amateur espionage move worthy of a cub scout playing spy. But that’s what would appear Craig Murray had done in the case of the DNC emails leaked to WikiLeaks.

That Murray would be a high value target for American counter-intelligence to monitor for the reason of his high profile association with WikiLeaks is beyond obvious. For Murray then to state

murray_wikileaks-1

“I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things”

…goes to the practically bizarre when coming from a former United Kingdom ambassador to Uzbekistan. The UK is little different to the USA in the case of embassies providing cover for spies; in which case Murray should at least have some rudimentary espionage understanding such as YOU DO NOT MEET YOUR SOURCE DIRECTLY WHEN YOU ARE A HIGH PROFILE TARGET OF YOUR ADVERSARY’S COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE HUNTING YOUR (in this case, WikiLeaks) SOURCE(S)

Then, we have WikiLeak’s Assange giving what amounts to a ‘Glomar’ ‘I will neither confirm or deny’ response concerning the murder (assassination?) of Seth Rich after appearing to suggest Rich was the source of the DNC emails leak:

Beyond this, WikiLeaks offering a $20,000 reward for the solving of the Seth Rich murder is laughable, that’s what an American west coast upscale community would offer for the arrest of a serial killer of the neighborhood’s cats. Two million dollars might get two seconds’ attention of a corruptible counter-intelligence agent with knowledge of a professional hit on Seth Rich, twenty million might even net an inside the agency sucker willing to take the exceedingly high risk to one’s life (almost certain death) that would attend selling out an agency hit man for substantial lucre. In truth, the WikiLeaks reward offer amounts to little more than a tabloid publicity stunt.

Narcissism is a blinding thing; and a self-righteous narcissism is no exception. Ambassador Murray could have every good intention but on the face of it, he had seriously screwed up. Murray and WikiLeaks should come clean, there is little to lose. If Seth Rich was a source, and Murray had met with him, there is more to be gained by stating so; there would be nothing given up any intelligence agency involved would not already know. The only thing at stake here would be a hit to ego & image.

Craig Murray stating ‘I had a serious lapse of professional judgement and this almost certainly resulted in the death of Seth Rich’ would be the most newsworthy move WikiLeaks could take if in any respect this were true; to counter the CIA’s ‘the Russians hacked the DNC’ propaganda lie, in which there is much invested by the agency.

Meanwhile, Murray subsequently barred from the United States appears to be, in a  manner of speaking, a message to Murray: ‘thank you very much for the lapse of judgement, we have taken full advantage and won’t be requiring your services after this.’

And were Murray to sincerely, thoroughly investigate the history of Sam Adams, he might be grateful he could not personally attend his receiving an award with a namesake who cynically exploited patriotism to benefit his close associate’s considerable smuggling enterprise

August 20017 updates:

1 August an audio tape is leaked in which Seymour Hersh states the FBI knows it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails:

“What the [FBI] report says is that some time in late Spring… he makes contact with WikiLeaks, that’s in his computer,” he says. “Anyway, they found what he had done is that he had submitted a series of documents — of emails, of juicy emails, from the DNC”

On 9 August The Nation magazine publishes a column on a group on independent experts…

“Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year”

…stating the forensic evidence demonstrates a leak, not a hack, which backs Murray’s and the Hersh assertions.

On 18 August Antiwar.com reports Congressman Dana  Rohrabacher has met with Assange concerning the DNC mails and further suggests Assange is holding the DNC leak evidence as a bargaining chip to acquire a pardon himself and leverage wikileaks. This would fit Assange’s self-centered, persecuted savior complex which never ceases to amaze, this guy has allowed the USA to push towards the brink with Russia, for months, because he’s tired of his embassy life in London, a circumstance that is entirely his own fault for the simple fact he didn’t have the self-discipline to keep his dick in his pants.

Certain alternative media stars either fail to realize or selectively black out the fact Julian Assange was a critical gear in the intelligence agency (primarily CIA & MOSSAD) information operations responsible for the so-called ‘Arab Spring’, leading to not only revolution and counter-revolution in Egypt but also the overthrow of Gaddafi and the Syrian ‘civil war.’

How do Glen Greenwald, Caitlin Johnstone, Elizabeth Vos, Chris Hedges, Vanessa Beeley and Raul Ilargi Meijer (among others), when defending their perception of Assange as a hero, drive their square peg into the round hole of Wikileaks supported the intelligence agency geopolitical engineering called the Arab Spring?

More than the preceding, with the first major university engineering study in, four years in the making and released in late summer 2019, demonstrating World Trade Center Building 7 did not fall on 9/11 according to the official narrative, where is Assange on the matter? 

The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST [National Institute of Standards and Technology] and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building”

WTC_7 - 1

William Engdahl nailed Assange on the matter nine years ago:

“Yet a closer examination of the public position of Assange on one of the most controversial issues of recent decades, the forces behind the September 11, 2001 attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center shows him to be curiously establishment. When the Belfast Telegraph interviewed him on July 19, he stated,

“”Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It’s important not to confuse these two….” What about 9/11?: “I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.” What about the Bilderberg Conference?: “That is vaguely conspiratorial, in a networking sense. We have published their meeting notes.”” –Julian Assange [bold RTW]

“That statement from a person who has built a reputation on being anti-establishment is more than notable. First, as thousands of physicists, engineers, military professionals and airline pilots have testified, the idea that 19 barely-trained Arabs armed with box-cutters could divert four US commercial jets and execute the near-impossible strikes on the Twin Towers and Pentagon over a time period of 93 minutes with not one Air Force NORAD military interception, is beyond belief. Precisely who executed the professional attack is a matter for genuine unbiased international inquiry.”

A thumbnail history of a western intelligence asset:

How does Julian Assange both; take credit for the cables release (cablegate) giving important momentum to the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ and deny he had been an agent of US intelligence who’d been instigating and engineering the very same Arab Spring via CIA fronts like Freedom House?

In 2008 the USA Department of State had begun training future Arab Spring leaders in the USA, instructing them how to organize demonstrations via social media, with the assistance of CIA fronts Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy, coordinated with the National Security Council by the Department of State’s Shaarik Zafar.

Subsequent to this, the WikiLeaks Arab Spring fable begins with the 2010 release of diplomatic cables as the demiurge creating a universal movement for democracy in the Arab world. Meanwhile, in 2007 Julian Assange had been the house guest of Miss Egypt, that nations number one corporate prostitute whose commercial sponsor (Pantene) ties directly to Procter and Gamble. Amy Goodman sucks up Assange’s story of Miss Egypt’s concerns for social justice and how he managed live with her literally wedged into American security, and what he was up to supposedly unbeknownst to them:

Amy Goodman: “You lived in Egypt for a time”

Julian Assange: “I lived in Egypt during 2007, so I’m familiar with the Mubarak regime and the tensions within the Egyptian environment. Actually, I was staying at the time, rather unusual circumstance, I was staying in Ms. Egypt’s house. And, Ms. Egypt’s house – other than having paintings of Ms. Egypt all throughout – was clustered right between the U.S. Embassy and the U.N. High Commission with a van outside fueled with 24 soldiers in front of my front door. So, for the type of work we were doing, this seemed to be the ultimate cover to be nested right amongst this”

p__g_egypt-1

^ Assange’s ‘cover’

NOT. You don’t live with Procter and Gamble’s premier Arab World corporate prostitute located between buildings crawling with American, United Nations, and Egyptian security & intelligence, other than with an official nod of approval. I think it’s very clear who was ‘providing cover.’

Timeline:
2007 Assange is living literally next door to the US Embassy in Egypt in an area overrun with American intelligence and security.
2008 the future Arab Spring leaderships’ training in social media is initiated by the USA.
2010 WikiLeaks releases the ‘cables’ inspiring the Egyptian (and other Arab) youth to join the Arab Spring under USA trained leadership, already in place.

Trying to square Julian Assange with his message is like trying to drive a square peg into a round hole. How does this toilet spin? Let’s try:

‘CIA, via Freedom House is training and coordinating the Arab Spring leadership. Julian Assange is releasing cables towards motivating the larger Arab youth to join the Arab Spring under that very same CIA trained and coordinated leadership. What the CIA is doing is bad. What Assange is doing is good.’

Somehow that works for alternative and progressive media.

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

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

Assange’s organization, WikiLeaks, would be the target of each of these methods by multiple intelligence agencies. How do the symptoms stack up? Assange’s judgement, when dealing with what turns out to have been a FBI ‘asset’ (to avoid confusion, we won’t say ‘agent’) ..

“In January 2011, Thordarson was implicated in a bizarre political scandal in which a mysterious “spy computer” laptop was found running unattended in an empty office in the parliament building. “If you did [it], don’t tell me,” Assange told Thordarson, according to unauthenticated chat logs provided by Thordarson.

“I will defend you against all accusations, ring [sic] and wrong, and stick by you, as I have done,” Assange told him in another chat the next month. “But I expect total loyalty in return””

Prior to this, Assange had been warned by a former WikiLeaks ally:

“When Julian met him for the first or second time, I was there,” says Birgitta Jonsdottir, a member of Icelandic Parliament who worked with WikiLeaks on Collateral Murder, the Wikileaks release of footage of a US helicopter attack in Iraq. “And I warned Julian from day one, there’s something not right about this guy… I asked not to have him as part of the Collateral Murder team.”

Now we have to ask; is Assange just stupid or does he tolerate moles in his organization? Which brings us to another glaring inconsistency.

The Guardian had reported concerning the WikiLeaks supposed (reported widely in ‘mainstream’ media) ‘legal expert’ accompanying Edward Snowden, Sarah Harrison, on Snowden’s odyssey to Moscow:

“Despite her closeness to Assange, Harrison may seem a strange choice to accompany Snowden, as unlike several people close to WikiLeaks – most notably human rights lawyer Jennifer Robinson – Harrison has no legal qualifications or background”

Yeah, that’s likely why Snowden faxed perfectly useless asylum requests all over the world from the Moscow airport, not realizing (technically speaking, such as in an embassy) he had to be standing on the territory of the nation he would wish to acquire asylum in.

Now we have to ask again; is Assange just stupid? With a trained expert in international human rights law (asylum expert), Jennifer Robinson, available to WikiLeaks, instead Assange sends a rank amateur, Harrison, who is suddenly a ‘legal researcher’ that didn’t so much as know you cannot make an asylum claim to a nation whose territory you’re not standing on. This smells like an intelligence embed’s cover story.

Now to a stunning example of incompetence:

“Spending time with Assange, it’s hard not to start believing that dark forces are at work. According to him, everyone’s emails are being read. For that reason, he encourages anyone planning to leak a document to post it the old fashioned way, to his PO Box”

From 18 July 2010, when that incredible statement was published by The Independent, about every intelligence agency in the western world (if not the entire planet) arranged to red flag any/all mail addressed to WikiLeaks “PO Box”, except for the fact this would already have been the case. Julian Assange had just invited whistle-blowers, and people with whatever other motivations, to give themselves up to professional forensics analysis (fingerprints, DNA, and other possibilities such as analyzing method used to reproduce leaked information while looking for identity clues, whether USB thumb drive, paper media or whatever.)

assange_independent-1

Then, to the rest of the incredibly irresponsible paragraph:

“It’s ironic that an organisation bent on blowing secrets is itself so secretive, but Wikileaks couldn’t operate without reliable sources. Except that, amazingly, Wikileaks does not verify them. “We don’t verify our sources, we verify the documents. As long as they are bona fide it doesn’t matter where they come from. We would rather not know.””

This invites culled or customized document dumps where there had been  deliberate omissions strategically calculated to mislead. Missing critical components, a collection put together by intelligence agency and dropped on WikiLeaks as an information operation would be a big temptation; recalling former Pentagon liaison to the CIA, Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty speaking of the Pentagon Papers:

[They’re] “unreliable, inaccurate and marred by serious omissions. They are a contrived history”

Who would know better than one of the Pentagon Papers authors? Colonel Prouty goes on to note:

“That I had written parts of some of them proves that they were not genuine Pentagon papers, because my work at that time was devoted to support of the CIA”

Of course most those outside the intelligence world would not know military is the largest CIA cover story for its spies and that all of those in uniform who’d been writing and assembling the Pentagon Papers were working for CIA. That’s the nature of the propaganda beast.

Now, to the recent ‘Russians hacked the election’ and ‘Assange is a Russian agent’ toilet spin coming out of the USA’s mainstream newsrooms. The USA ‘intelligence’ report states:

“Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation, and precedents.”

Or by implication, let’s blame WikiLeaks and by extension, the Russians, because Assange is so poorly self-disciplined, sloppy, amateur and arrogant, he could be manipulated as an agent for ANYONE. In the case of WikiLeaks, this would appear to be true.

An agent or asset often does not even realize that is the role they serve. It is this last the USA’s intelligence people would have you believe is a possibility relating to WikiLeaks in relation to the so-called hack. But one should not jump to conclusion this phenomenon has Assange working solely for the Russians, just because the report’s disclaimer/weasel words essentially saying ‘if it all turns out to be bs we’re sorry’ weren’t pushed on the public by the long time CIA asset Washington Post:

wapo_hack-1

All major media has run with this Washington Post story. And how would CIA journalism embeds seek to epoxy this story in the wider public’s mind? It would be with followup stories making Russia the boogeyman on a wider range of related issues, particularly if there were little, nebulous or no evidence to back the original. Consequently we have:

wapo_grid_hack-1

“On Friday, the Washington Post published an earth-shattering report that Russian hackers had infiltrated the U.S. electricity grid through a Vermont utility.

“This was huge news, and for good reason. If Russian hackers, or any hackers for that matter, had found their way into the U.S. electricity grid, there would be almost no end to the harm they could cause. Not surprisingly, the Post story spread like wildfire.

“But it turns out that none of it was true. Zip. Zero. Nada.”

And there you have it; “the Post story spread like wildfire.” Too late to stuff that genie back in the bottle. Oh, and that’s the same Washington Post that had been busted for the fake ‘fake news’ story blaming numerous alternative news outlets for pushing Russian propaganda when in fact many were simply reporting what mainstream does not, particularly stories concerning corrupted American institutions. That one (the fake part) is embedded in the larger American psyche as though it were gospel. That’s how propaganda works.

Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post for $300 million. Bezos is also majority owner of Amazon, which holds a $600 million contract with the CIA. Which do you suppose is the better business move for billionaire Bezos? Calling out the CIA on its malfeasance? Or the Post taking CIA scripts for its reporting?

What should one look for if Assange is actually the asset of a western intelligence agency set on framing the Russians?  The 1st clue would be the Washington Post putting plenty of ink into spinning the story, here’s a few samples:

Julian Assange’s claim that there was no Russian … – Washington Post

Assange’s denials, counter-intuitive as this might seem, could be on the up & up and he’s still an intelligence asset. Only not necessarily a Russian intelligence asset, going to:

The 2nd clue would be if there were infighting between cliques in the USA’s national security establishment or a turf war. We have ample indications of that, and there is two distinct possibilities; the first being intelligence operatives aligned with the (pre-election) out of favor NSA-Pentagon-Christian Zionist-Israeli-Kissinger (Trump aligned) intelligence clique laundered the Clinton campaign [DNC] mails via a disgruntled Sanders supporter through to WikiLeaks to damage Clinton. The second possibility being the leaked mails were solely via a straightforward disgruntled Saunders Democrat; either case causing the (soon to be out of favor) Brennan-Obama-CIA-Brzezinski (Clinton aligned) clique to use the WikiLeaks release to frame Russia and damage Trump.

I’m of the opinion it is Trump aligned intelligence professionals laundered the emails through to WikiLeaks; an organization that has shown itself highly vulnerable to penetration and manipulation, in the main due to the incredible narcissism, arrogance, carelessness and associated poor judgement of Julian Assange.

WikiLeaks likely has been manipulated as an agent by several intelligence agencies on multiple occasions. In fact the organization smells so bad, Vegas should put its bookies on events surrounding Julian Assange.

Meanwhile, try driving this square peg…

On the face of it TOR appears to be a subversive hacktivist site, offering anonymity to anarchists, political dissidents, leakers, internet activists and the underground criminal world. In fact, the systems used on the site were developed by a unit of The US Office of Naval Intelligence as part of US “Public Diplomacy”. Currently TOR’s three biggest sources of funding are: The US Department of Defence, The US State Department and The Board of Broadcasting – another propaganda arm of the US Government”

…into this round hole:

Contact. If you need help using Tor you can contact WikiLeaks for assistance in setting it up using our simple webchat available at: https://wikileaks.org/talk

Tor is a supposedly secure system developed by US intelligence so their ‘color revolutionaries’ (abroad) could communicate securely (without being intercepted by the national governments the USA was looking to overthrow.) Meanwhile it was sales-pitched as a system to elude everyone and everything. NO CHANCE. WikiLeaks inviting leaks and communications via Tor is like inviting Uncle Sam to sit at the WikiLeaks kitchen table in WikiLeaks intimate discussions with those providing leaked materials.

Finally, it would be small wonder if Assange denied a childhood cult experience that would call into account plausible frailties integrated to his underlying psychology. Should the horrors of such an experience forgo any public examination? Not if you’re the man who has placed himself in position to demand answers; as to what could be the underlying cause of so many conflicts between proposed facts? Could Assange have lived 3 or so years with a cult member and NOT have been exposed to the cult? There are too many conflicts in what Assange proposes, as opposed to the more established facts, to responsibly look the other way.

Assange’s exposure to the Hamilton-Byrne cult (a.k.a. The Family) as a child is both  admitted and denied. It is (sort of) admitted his step-father was associated with the cult and denied by Assange he had been exposed to the cult. The step-father was in his life from ages 8 to 11, bringing up a photo throwing Assange’s denials into doubt:

assange_cult_photo-1

Drugs, sexual abuse and every child an identical blonde

It’s not often I’ve written on WikiLeaks, however my position hasn’t changed significantly since I’d first written on the subject six years ago. Whether Assange is unaware he’s done the CIA large favors in the past (Assange’s years 8-11 profile like an MKUltra field exercise) or is aware and has woke up to the fact Langley, Virginia, has a habit of stabbing its assets in the  back, is not so important as people knowing WikiLeaks is a living, functioning urban legend … insofar as the image versus the reality –

alternet_assange-1

Screenshot from my old blog deleted by AlterNet, text HERE. Did I get it wrong? Maybe, when considering former CIA officer Robert Steele has flat-out stated Julian Assange has a history of ties to MOSSAD. More likely, in my view, is the idea Assange has served both.

Listen beginning at minute 4:55 on Assange-MOSSAD

*

Note: The group photo with the child Assange (it clearly is Julian) has been around the internet for years and I’ve yet to see it disputed as authentic. It’s almost as though mainstream has decided if they pretend it’s not there, it’ll go away. Consequently, you will only find it at more extreme ‘conspiracy’ websites, which seems to be a means of discrediting the image by default.

29 November 2018: New article on  the myth of wikileaks HERE

Updated 25 September 2019

*

Related:

Incompetent Espionage & WikiLeaks

Pentagon Papers, CIA and the Lies of Daniel Ellsberg

*

In the Tom Englehardt interview with Laura Poitras (Snowden documentary film-maker) wondering if, in relation to the security state…

“the goal that they proclaim is not the goal”

…is the most astute and least explored observation in not only the interview, but the least explored phenomena of the entire security state. The usurping of our constitution and rule of law is not about fighting terror and fighting terror is in fact a purposeful avenue to coup de état. The same purpose is served with NATO aggression with pretext of Ukraine. A social tension to a degree where military is justified to make policy (we already see this) is avenue to suspension of habeas corpus.

Where Poitras has missed the boat and is to a great extent misled, is also where professional intelligence information operations will spend high $ and go into hyper-drive/overtime to shape the public discourse away from the deep state goal. That strategy can include deliberate leaks accompanied by persecution/prosecution to draw attention to the Mannings & Assanges of this world, to keep the focus of personalities like Poitras off the mark. Katrina vanden Heuval, in her ‘The Nation’ interview with Snowden, brought up a ‘deep state’ concept which Snowden acknowledged but the subject was as quickly dropped. Why? Because they’ve no idea where that trail leads to?

So long as the focus can kept be on personalities revealing facts but not leading to motive, and individual acts & information that distract from an internal ‘deep state’ are the obsession, the perpetrators within a security state’s concealed agenda will be winning. In this scenario, if Snowden was unforeseen, Assange has been a tool where the man is the issue, as much as what he has released doesn’t touch where the internal threat of the security state issues from. This becomes a distraction and creates numerous rabbit trails obscuring the source of the malevolent security state behaviors. Poitras and her ilk on the left hasn’t seen through this.

One reason for Poitras and the left’s myopia is embrace of a political mythology. When your archetype myth is challenged, there is a visceral rejection of evidence that is staring one in the face. In fact Pentagon liaison to the CIA, L. Fletcher Prouty, a man who would be in position to know without a doubt as one of the authors of the so-called Pentagon Papers, long ago fingered Daniel Ellsberg as at the center of a deliberately engineered (by the security state) leak meant to shift responsibility for the failures of Vietnam policy from the CIA to the military. Ellsberg is a keystone of the deep state disinformation campaign on the left; the people who’ve built information that tend to support Colonel Prouty’s revelation (not a hypothesis) are on the center right and better positioned to know where the deep state derives from (the right.)

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation is one such organization. Presided over by a Reagan White House attorney, Mikey Weinstein, there is no one better positioned to point to a hyper-right-wing Christian religious coup at the Pentagon. Colonel Prouty, an old line conservative, had labeled this deep state cult ‘The Secret Team’ and described it as a “new religion.” Investigative reporter Jeff Sharlet has documented the related Doug Coe cult extensively. Seymour Hersh and more have touched on it. It has both Catholic & Protestant membership that overlaps with Opus Dei and Assemblies of God (and other sects.) This endeavor had began in the 1930s with Hitler sympathetic-religious businessmen organized into cells based on intelligence agency model. The goal of an elite, weaponized, Christian hierarchy usurping western democratic institutions, an international endeavor based in powerful corporate board interests integrated to our most powerful law enforcement, intelligence agency and military personalities, is nearly within reach for what amounts to a self-annointed ‘chosen’ Christian religious cult-international criminal syndicate.

So long as the left embraces a mythology induced myopia that precludes a straightforward exam of this reality, the deep state will remain poised to win at the end of a day that is not very far away-

f6

^ Daniel Ellsberg behind the curtain

Related:

WikiLeaks & Spy Agencies Distracting from the real actors

Background material on America’s deep state:

Sociopaths & Democracy

The proposal in this essay “In fact it is perfectly possible by the time Snowden had traveled to Moscow with Harrison, he may no longer have been in possession of the documents at all” in fact had been almost immediately established as the case in fact, when Snowden stated he was no longer in possession of any NSA documents when he’d traveled to Russia, in his Moscow interview with NBC

It is a near impossible task to try and wipe egg off someone’s face, that is, if that someone doesn’t care to acknowledge the facts, if the facts shake their foundation in reality or they are simply willfully stubborn. When egg yolk has dried on ceramic, those of you who know how to wash dishes will know to use fingernails, or risk scratches and look for the steel wool. So this analysis is going to be abrasive to the idealists in the peace movement and associated journalists concerned with social justice. And it is an attempt to pull Glenn Greenwald’s chestnuts out of the fire, before they are reduced to ashes by counter-espionage and damage control spooks. Good luck with that, is the cynical admonition to myself, because this one might get eggs thrown at me with a vengeance.

Our present story begins precisely 11 months ago, 23 June 2013, when The Guardian had reported concerning the WikiLeaks supposed (reported widely in ‘mainstream’ media) ‘legal expert’ accompanying Edward Snowden, Sarah Harrison, on Snowden’s odyssey to Moscow:

“Despite her closeness to Assange, Harrison may seem a strange choice to accompany Snowden, as unlike several people close to WikiLeaks – most notably human rights lawyer Jennifer Robinson – Harrison has no legal qualifications or background”

Yeah, that’s likely why Snowden faxed perfectly useless asylum requests all over the world from the Moscow airport, not realizing (technically speaking, such as in an embassy) he had to be standing on the territory of the nation he would wish to acquire asylum in. But it gets by far more interesting. As I’d pointed out in my piece ‘WikiLeaks & Spy Agencies‘…

“In espionage [or counter-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”

…now, we will look at this a bit more closely in a related development of the past several days.

On 19 May, 2014, the new venture of Greenwald (among others) ‘The Intercept’ published a piece based on the Snowden NSA documents, concerning MYSTIC sub-project SOMALGET, detailing how entire nations are being prepared for TOTAL surveillance of phone traffic, inclusive of all audio conversation. The apparent ‘pilot program’ of laboratory test animals is the Bahamas and an unnamed nation (in the intercept article.)

mystic_somalget_final

^NSA illustration via The Intercept

Almost immediately, Julian Assange (@WikiLeaks) and Greenwald were in a ‘twitter’ spat over Greenwald with-holding the 2nd nations name, Assange claiming Greenwald’s rationale for following long established journalism protocol to protect at risk persons by with-holding information was essentially selling out. AND THEN, WikiLeaks (Assange) threatened to reveal the nation’s name, if The Intercept and Greenwald refused to do so .. and subsequently named Afghanistan. What we see here, on its face, is brilliant counter-espionage work, of a nature so serious a threat to Greenwald (and others) journalism at The Intercept, as to appear to send Greenwald to Moscow to meet with Snowden, or so rumor would have it:

^Destination Moscow (in closing remarks by hostess)

The problem with WikiLeaks naming the unnamed country? Now, the ‘mainstream’ (CIA manipulated) media can claim in full on attack on Greenwald and the others at The Intercept, these journalists have no credibility insofar as security of content concerning the NSA documents in their possession. As well, there most certainly will be assessment of possibility to link Greenwald (and others at The Intercept) to any criminal case being developed against Assange. Touche, NSA! Counter-espionage has drawn blood.

Now to the question .. how did WikiLeaks acquire the name of Afghanistan? WikiLeaks isn’t saying. But first suspicion would naturally fall on close Assange confidant Sarah Harrison who’d been with Snowden ’24/7′ for weeks while Snowden was sorting out where he might be able to safely stay (having to ultimately settle on Russia.) I believe this is the least likely scenario, however we will go there first. It’s as simple as Sarah Harrison would have stole the documents from Snowden. If that were the case, WikiLeaks has all of the Snowden NSA disclosures and they don’t dare admit they’d violated Snowden’s trust. If Greenwald is indeed in Moscow meeting with Snowden, it would go to exploring this possibility. But I doubt this is what happened, not because WikiLeaks would not have stolen the documents if they could have, but because I expect Snowden was smart enough to secure the documents throughout Sarah Harrison’s stay with him, not every possible ‘honey-pot’ or using a woman in seduction for operational purposes is going to be successful. Whether Harrison were Assange’s mole or a British intelligence agent or double agent, Snowden was not a good candidate to fall for this sort of operation when it is demonstrable Snowden’s own girlfriend had no idea what he was  up to in the months and days leading up to his revelations and flight. The man is well disciplined in the rules of personal secrecy attending espionage. In fact it is perfectly possible by the time Snowden had traveled to Moscow with Harrison, he may no longer have been in possession of the documents at all. But the brilliant aspect of this, from the point of view of counter-espionage and exploiting public perception is, it will appear the documents were not secured and Greenwald & Laura Poitras can be pilloried as irresponsible and endangering the USA’s national security, inclusive of putting lives at risk, possibly to a point of building a criminal case. Meanwhile, if Greenwald had traveled to Moscow, he is barking up the wrong tree.

The more likely scenario is quite straightforward. The NSA arranged to ‘leak’ the information concerned to WikiLeaks, for clear intent of going after Greenwald and The Intercept with PsyOps, sowing distrust and misleading the principal players in a counter-operation that will be highly publicized propaganda.

So, one might ask, how can leaking the nation’s name, Afghanistan, almost certainly laundered via some CIA embed or ‘social justice’ source known to WikiLeaks, square with the USA purportedly concerned for the lives put at risk? Here is where the cynicism of evil plays in the world of spy craft; people at the top, certainly inclusive of Obama’s CIA Director John ‘Kill List‘ Brennan, NSA associates and ‘friends’ play the game of ‘trade-offs.’ The people whose lives are ‘at risk’ due to the disclosures will be relatively low level assets, easily expendable technicians. They are suddenly fodder for the greater gain of going after Greenwald and damaging The Intercept. It is actually as simple as that. If some of these technicians are killed, so much the better from the point of view at the top, that will be frosting on the cake of working to destroy (and likely pursue a frame-up with criminal charges) those persons who initially broke the Snowden story and facilitated the NSA documents release.

To Glenn & Co at The Intercept, welcome to the real world of spies.

Related stories:

Above Top Secret How (not) To Leak

WikiLeaks and Spy Agencies Probable information operations

Spy

*

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.

*

Related:

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

*

%d bloggers like this: