Archives for posts with tag: WikiLeaks

Recalling…

Is it a case of I don’t understand Russian propaganda or is it Russian propagandists don’t fully understand the Western mentality or is it a case of the Russians are handling the madmen of NATO with ‘kid gloves’ ?

…now we dig into the enigma of Russian propaganda in relation to Wikileaks and exactly ‘W.T.F.‘ is going on?

kim_dotcom - 1

Ignoring Kim Dotcom’s assigning of responsibility to Hillary Clinton (a deep state muppet whose singular intelligence is best represented in her giant ass), Dotcom has a point; Robert Mueller’s steadfast determination to avoid any interaction with Dotcom and Assange, only waiting to see them both buried in a maximum security USA prison (where they can’t talk.) Why? [1]

Because circumstantial evidence it was the (promptly assassinated) Seth Rich provided the DNC mails to Wikileaks with a memory stick is so strong, we are only missing the electronic trail of stick itself, and testimony of those (still alive) parties arranging transfer & receipt of data on the stick (together with evidence concerning the DNC mails’ chain of custody), or Kim Dotcom and Julian Assange (likely with an assist from Craig Murray), to send the whole Crowdstrike-Fancy Bear fairy tale to the sewer from which it had emerged (laundered false evidence likely originating with John Brennan’s CIA, THE reason our corrupt FBI leadership never permitted their cyber-experts to forensically examine the DNC servers), back down the toilet together with ‘the Russians did it’ accusation and Robert Mueller’s special counsel mandate. [2]

The Enigma(s)

Julian Assange’s only (or best) chance at avoiding extradition to the USA is to put the DNC mails evidence into the public domain and make the political price of his extradition too high, with the entire ‘the Russians did it’ case collapsed in the public purview. Instead, that moron insists on with-holding the evidence as a classified ‘bargaining chip’ evidenced in his attempt to negotiate a pardon from Trump via Dana Rohrabacher that utterly failed to get past the USA’s deep state minions (John Kelly) and saw Rohrabacher tuck his tail and withdraw from the effort. Result? Status quo ante, the ‘witch hunt’ (Robert Mueller farce) goes on.

Yet Russian propaganda continues to spin Wikileaks in a positive light even as that organization has caused tremendous damage to Russia’s geopolitical interests with allowing the false informing of the Western democracies populace with the DNC ‘hack’ fantasy, by refusing to put it to rest. Recent example is RT’s Jesse Ventura hosting guest John Kiriakou where they gush praise over Wikileaks and Kiriakou disingenuously insists Wikileaks has never given up a source, perhaps technically true…

kim_dotcom - 1 (2)

At minute 10:50: “WikiLeaks is the only organization that has not blown a source” -John Kiriakou [3]

…but in actuality is a lie by omission, overlooking a non-Wikileaks player involved:

kim_dotcom - 1 (1)

[4] & [5]

kim_dotcom - 1 (3)

Setting aside the blatantly propagandized image of Wikileaks by Western press, one would expect either American ‘alternative’ media, or alternatively, Russian media, would have explored the numerous holes in what amounts to the urban legend surrounding Julian Assange & Wikileaks, because Assange’s  character is certainly not unassailable and the Wikileaks organization is certainly not immune to penetration and manipulation by intelligence agencies. Exploring this subject could/should include Assange’s refusal to provide evidence and name Seth Rich, a dead man, as the source, ending the charade, but he won’t. How is Assange getting such stupid advice as to refuse the act that could serve to save his butt by making his extradition too great a political price to pay? Yet exploring the obvious hasn’t happened in any serious way this investigator is aware of outside of this site’s own assessments. [6]

What is ‘radioactive’ having to do with exploring Wikileaks in this regard? Why isn’t alternative media and Russian media backing Kim Dotcom’s assertions and calling out Wikileaks on the DNC mails, there is quite strong independent evidence and sources, including Seymour Hersh, to support Seth Rich was the source. Is the alternative media intimidated at the thought of alienating Assange’s supporters to point of allowing the farce of ‘Russiagate’ go on? Is the real price the Russians are unwilling to risk to do with an idea the madmen of NATO would pull the nuclear trigger rather than face accountability, that is a case of ‘kid gloves’ ?

In the age of suicide bombers and ‘backpack nukes’, it makes little difference, someone needs to call the criminals out; either you chance it and call their bluff or likely we could all get blown to bits anyway [7]

kim_dotcom - 1 (4)

Related: On Wikileaks

A former Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence for Special Forces, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background (no degree) is social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire.

Contact: penucquemspeaks@googlemail.com

Assange-Goodman - 1

An old American ‘boy-prank’ directed at a deserving person (to send a message) was to fill a small paper bag with a fresh dog shit, put just a little bit of lighter fluid (kerosene) on it, place this on the porch of the target, light the bag on fire, ring the doorbell and run. If all went to plan, the target would open their door to sight of a small fire and reflexively stamp it out with their feet. As a metaphor, I’m inclined to think someone had done this to Matt Taibbi, and perhaps, to the editors of RollingStone.

RollingStone’s Why You Should Care About the Julian Assange Case [1] by Matt Taibbi, is a piece this writer (yours truly) finds not only disingenuous but worthy of an intelligence agency propaganda award.

The thrust of the article being any prosecution of Julian Assange endangers journalism, we’ll dissect Taibbi’s premise concerning a very plausible secret/sealed indictment of Assange:

“Assange’s lawyer Barry Pollack told Rolling Stone he had “not been informed that Mr. Assange has been charged, or the nature of any charges.”

“Pollock and other sources could not be sure, but within the Wikileaks camp it’s believed that this charge, if it exists, is not connected to the last election.

““I would think it is not related to the 2016 election since that would seem to fall within the purview of the Office of Special Counsel,” Pollack said.

“If you hate Assange because of his role in the 2016 race, please take a deep breath and consider what a criminal charge that does not involve the 2016 election might mean. An Assange prosecution could give the Trump presidency broad new powers to put Trump’s media “enemies” in jail, instead of just yanking a credential or two. The Jim Acosta business is a minor flap in comparison”

These four paragraphs likely have Gina Haspel’s information operations people over at Langley, Virginia, orgasming in their pants. Taibbi omits the fact trying Assange on charges unrelated to the ‘the Russians did it’ is a solid means of shutting Assange up and burying him where he cannot shed any light concerning the 2016 elections’ intelligence agency caper. Trying Assange on unrelated charges, prior to sending him to deep isolation at, for instance, Florence ADX super-max, actually solves a CIA problem. How’d that work? The American legal principle of ‘relevance’ [2] where practically infinite technicalities can be argued to exclude any mention or reference to another case possibly pending before another court, such as the work of the incredibly corrupt [3], [4] special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, example given. Yep, sending Julian off to super-max on charges unrelated to the 2016 ‘the Russians did it’ would be perfectly predictable (desirable outcome) for those intelligence operatives who’d used Wikileaks to frame Russia, and some of Trump’s associates [5], [6], for meddling in the USA’s so-called ‘democratic processes.’ Hey, Matt Taibbi, was it Gina Haspel set the dog shit on fire you proceeded stamp out? Because a bit further on in his article, Taibbi goes on to screw it up even more:

“The perception that Assange worked with Vladimir Putin to achieve his ends has further hardened responses among his former media allies.

“As to the latter, Assange denies cooperating with the Russians, insisting his source for the DNC leak was not a “state actor.” It doesn’t matter. That PR battle has already been decided”

Beyond political fellatio, Gina Haspel would arrange a literal blow-job for Taibbi (even give it herself, if only she were pretty enough) because RollingStone has gone on record stating the DNC mails leak story is passé, out-of-fashion, old news. In other words, Taibbi is saying there is no point in investigative journalism looking into whether (the promptly assassinated) Seth Rich was Wikileaks’ source of the DNC mails, despite more than ample evidence, even a ‘preponderance of the evidence’ or the USA civil law standard necessary for conviction. [7] He might as well have written “Don’t go there.” Why? We’ll come back to this.

Taibbi:

“Although Assange may not be a traditional journalist in terms of motive, what he does is essentially indistinguishable from what news agencies do, and what happens to him will profoundly impact journalism”

This is not only wrong, Taibbi (apparently without noticing) contradicts it himself later in the article:

“…the relationship between Assange and the press deteriorated quickly. A lot of this clearly had to do with Assange’s personality. Repeat attempts by (ostensibly sympathetic) reporters to work with Assange ended in fiascoes … gain[ing] him a reputation for egomania and grandiosity.

“Partners like the Committee to Protect Journalists, who had been sifting through Wikileaks material to prevent truly harmful information from getting out, began to be frustrated by what they described as a frantic pace of releases”

Precisely. Journalists not only vet their sources (Assange, in the past, has stated Wikileaks does not [8] ) but they also must assess whether they can do more harm than good with the secrets they are in possession of, and consider how to finesse information that must be divulged in the public interest in such a way as to not create social chaos. One means of attempting this would be to refer the actual material (documents) evidencing state crimes to the apropos authorities, while restraining oneself to writing about having done this within the context of the story, putting the relevant authority on the spot and in a position of having to do something. Wikileaks dumping massive caches is not journalism. This is not a case of, as Taibbi would have it, “…what he [Assange] does is essentially indistinguishable from what news agencies do”, that is if the news-service is not corrupted and taking intelligence agency scripts to amplify fake stories and bury real stories (like the Associated Press, Reuters, Washington Post, New York Times do, and now, clearly, RollingStone also does.)

This brings us to Assange had attempted, via Dana Rohrabacher, a horse-trade with Trump, where Assange gets immunity from prosecution or a pardon and Trump gets definitive proof the Wikileaks DNC mails source was not Russia. [9] The people surrounding Trump, notably Chief of Staff John Kelly, shut that avenue down. [10] Taibbi, with his ‘don’t go there’ posed as “It doesn’t matter. That PR battle has already been decided” obviously isn’t going to touch this, rather wants it buried. Why?

Possibly, even likely, because of a phenomenon we had seen slip out of the closet during the Obama POTUS tenure, meetings with John Brennan on “Kill List Tuesdays” where America’s extra-judicial assassinations targeting list had been regularly updated, to include American citizens. [11], [12], [13]

We can likely add to the CIA’s three known assassinations of American citizens abroad these past seven years, two of those ordered by Obama and one ordered by Trump, at least two domestic assassinations by CIA, both of which tie into this assessment; Seth Rich and Michael Hastings.

Seth Rich removed, whether at that time incidental to present circumstance or not, doesn’t matter; that is to say if Rich was initially silenced for the leak to send a message, or silenced to remove a dupe, is immaterial to the present moment. Either way, Rich’s removal is part and parcel of what enabled the framing of Trump and Wikileaks for ‘Russian collusion.’ That’s a big piece of the ‘problematic witnesses’ solved for the people behind the making a patsy of Russia. It is entirely possible the DNC leak was initially a MOSSAD operation (Trump has been Bibi’s wet dream) and Rich was gunned down by Brennan’s CIA, with a ‘Russian collusion’ follow-on or the neo-liberal intelligence agency faction’s attempt to reverse the damage. A second possibility (the one I favor) is the leaked DNC mails by a duped Seth Rich reflects the internecine warfare between neocon and neoliberal elements in American intelligence. A third (least likely, in view of developments, but still plausible) possibility is, Rich’s had been an unmanipulated, straight-foward motivation based in a rather ‘naive idealism’ (victim of a Wikileaks bait and hook.)

Michael Hastings, whose car of its own will, took upon itself a desire to run into a tree at high speed and explode with the force of a military grade limpet mine, had been 1) investigating then CIA Director John Brennan, 2) in contact with Wikileaks, and 3) writing for RollingStone [14], all shortly before he died. A lesson Taibbi and his editors at RollingStone have taken to heart? It is no stretch of the imagination, at all, to assume Taibbi (and his employer) had subsequently been put on notice ‘you will take our script and run with it or die.’ The alternative is, RollingStone, editors & writers, had suddenly morphed into incredibly stupid parties who, by pure coincidence, appear to follow diktat and promote the intelligence agency line. Which do you think is more likely? Of course, it is also possible the insect species ignavum nominare [15] had crawled up Taibbi’s butt altogether independently of any specific threat.

Pointing towards wrapping this up, with turning our attention to Wikileaks per se, the following question must be posed: how is it certain alternative media stars miss that Julian Assange was a critical gear in the intelligence agencies (primarily CIA & MOSSAD) information operations responsible for the ‘Arab Spring’ … leading to not only revolution and counter-revolution in Egypt but also the overthrow of Gaddafi and the Syrian so-called ‘civil war.’ [16] How do Chris Hedges (RT’s On Contact), Caitlin Johnstone (medium.com), Glenn Greenwald (The Intercept), Vanessa Beeley (21st Century Wire), Raul Ilargi Meijer (Automatic Earth), and Elizabeth Vos (Disobedient Media), among others, with their defense of Assange, drive the ‘Assange is a good guy’ square peg into the round hole of Wikileaks assisting intelligence agencies geopolitical engineering the so-called Arab Spring? [17] This is also a question certain Wikileaks personalities should be asking themselves, notably Baltasar Garzon, Jennifer Robinson, and Craig Murray.

A second question the Wikileaks staff should be asking, among themselves is, whose strategy is it to conceal THE critical information, information that can only be helpful to Assange when it is made public: the method and source used by Wikileaks to acquire the DNC mails? Is this concealment a strategy of Sarah Harrison? Does Wikileaks have an uncompromised, professional counter-intelligence unit? Because if you don’t, you’re not only a lot of stooges, the lot of you are ultimately stupid. Take a lesson from Amnesty International:

“My conclusion was that a high-level official of Amnesty International at that time, whom I will not name, was a British intelligence agent. Moreover, my fellow board member, who also investigated this independently of me, reached the exact same conclusion. So certainly when I am dealing with people who want to work with Amnesty in London, I just tell them, “Look, just understand, they’re penetrated by intelligence agents, U.K., maybe U.S., I don’t know, but you certainly can’t trust them” [18]

Finally, when it comes to what Russia HAS done, it is to use their propaganda [19] to ‘flip’ the ‘Assangemania’ [20] infecting the Western alternative press, in a disingenuous way so as to promote Assange as a straight-foward example of a persecuted whistle-blower by the corrupt fascism of Western institutions, but this strategy ultimately props up ‘the Russians did it’ Western intelligence propaganda lie; and one wonders when the Russian press will get this. Assange’s currency as an asset is exhausted, no matter which side of the contest is taking advantage.

References:

1 https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/taibbi-julian-assange-case-wikileaks-758883/

2 https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Federal_Rules_of_Evidence/Relevancy#Rule_403._Exclusion_of_Relevant_Evidence_on_Grounds_of_Prejudice,_Confusion,_or_Waste_of_Time

3 https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2017/03/08/the-cias-amazon-books/

4 https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2013/06/15/americas-deep-state-ii/

5 http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2018-09-13/local-news/Russiagate-Maltese-professor-Joseph-Mifsud-due-in-US-court-today-living-under-an-alias-6736196262

6 https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/05/26/the_maltese_phantom_of_russiagate_.html

7 https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2017/09/16/incompetent-espionage-wikileaks-iii/

8 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/online/wanted-by-the-cia-the-man-who-keeps-no-secrets-2029083.html

9 https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/pardon-me-rep-rohrabachers-curious-visit-with-assange/

10 https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/353744-kelly-wont-let-rohrabacher-talk-to-trump

11 https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-presidents-kill-list

12 https://www.politico.com/story/2010/12/judge-nixes-kill-list-suit-046079

13 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

14 https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/media/wikileaks-vault-7-dump-reignites-conspiracy-theories-surrounding-death-of-michael-hastings/news-story/0df1d06403d0223ce1cfc286a1e75325

15 https://www.translate.com/ignavum-nominare/english/6691827

16 https://www.democracynow.org/2011/7/6/wikileaks_founder_julian_assange_on_role

17 http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/12/arab-spring-egypt-strikes-back.html

18 http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/articles/article0004573.html

19 https://www.rt.com/about-us/

20 https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/10/15/assangemania/

A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background (no degree) is social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire.

Contact: penucquemspeaks@googlemail.com

New York taxpayers to shell out three billion to Jeff Bezos’ CIA liaised Amazon’s promise of 40,000 jobs. What’s wrong with this picture? The question I would pose is, how much of the three billion will see returns for the people who actually have to pay it out? How does the poor schmo from Schenectady benefit from subsidizing the artificially created upscale community in Long Island that will no doubt see inflated property values drive out the lower middle class with concurrent property tax increase and associated cost of living hikes? This taxpayer subsidy is consistent with Bezos’ raking in the hundred of millions contracting for CIA ‘cloud services’ apparently to be followed on with another ten billion providing the same for the Department of Defense, none of which brings returns to taxpaying citizens across the board. Read about it at Bloomberg:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-13/virginia-lures-amazon-for-a-bargain-compared-with-new-york-city

The preceding brings up an interesting, well thought out essay on executing billionaires and politicians (within the parameters of the social contract) by Joaquin Flores; raising (in my thinking) the failed American ‘equal protection’ (of the laws) principle, perhaps the future subject of a constitutional law essay at this blog:

https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/11/flores-the-people-want-blood-chinas-execution-of-billionaires-is-what-america-needs/

If CIA documents have turned up where ‘project medication’ was proposed to do the ‘truth serum’ thing (a CIA obsession since around 1950), you can bet your butt it was actually employed … disclaimers notwithstanding; sort of like when Blackwater was contracted to do CIA assassinations and Leon Panetta’s CIA claimed it was never more than a ‘powerpoint presentation’ even as Blackwater employed former green berets were admitting ‘people are getting whacked like crazy.’

https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/torture/secret-cia-document-shows-plan-test-drugs-prisoners

Forty nine pages of declassified ‘top secret’ documents reveal the weasel-words of the USA’s government concerning the Russian government’s ‘hack’ of the DNC mails; amounting to ‘we believe it because we want to believe it.’

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5031716-LEOPOLD-SHAPIRO-ODNI-FOIA-RUSSIA-HACKING.html

The preceding brings up wikileaks accused of releasing the DNC mails via a Russian hack and that organization denying Russia was the source but declining to offer proof. Why? Is it because Assange’s currency as an intelligence agency asset isn’t yet entirely exhausted? Consider this: 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 Chris Hedges, Caitlin Johnstone, 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? A case of ‘you can’t have your cake and eat it too.’ Example given, Chris Hedges, who is otherwise often an astute social observer, has an exceptionally severe case of the ‘assangemania‘ virus:

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/crucifying-julian-assange/

vs

WikiLeaks & Spy Agencies

Incompetent Espionage & WikiLeaks

Litmus Test

Agent Assange

The Arab Spring, A Modern Fable

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

A former Special Forces Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald is published in International Law as a layman (The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole) and has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background (no degree) is social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire.

Contact: penucquemspeaks@googlemail.com

 

 

^ Chris Hedges

 

1 - 1

^ Caitlin Johnstone

 

^ Glenn Greenwald

 

2 - 1

^ Vanessa Beeley

 

3 - 1

^ Raul Ilargi Meijer

 

MikiSpy

 ^ Julian Assange a.k.a. Micky Mossad

…well, you all probably get the idea ;p

Just a reminder to certain alternative media stars that 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 Chris Hedges, Caitlin Johnstone, Glenn Greenwald, Vanessa Beeley and Raul Ilargi Meijer, with their defense of Assange, drive the ‘Assange is a good guy’ square peg into the round hole of the intelligence agency geopolitical engineering called the Arab Spring?

A case of ‘you can’t have your cake and eat it too.’

On Assange

*

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. Seven assessments:

Kid Gloves (2)

From Behind: RollingStone Bends Its Readers Over

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.

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 update: New article on  the myth of wikileaks HERE

*

Related:

Incompetent Espionage & WikiLeaks

Pentagon Papers, CIA and the Lies of Daniel Ellsberg

*

%d bloggers like this: