Wikileaks et al. - The Free Flow of Information
Preface . Once upon a time they used to say that only God knew what went on behind closed doors. Today only those who run the surveillance equipment know. May the free flow of information allow us all to know.
In some circles it's widely accepted that knowledge is power, and the individual who excludes him or herself from the information loop risks becoming powerless. To convince yourselves of the concept, look at governments and corporations and the enormous amounts of information they have on the majority of the population and the power they wield over the many. Now look at the majority of humanity and how little information people have about their governments and those corporations which dominate the economic and social spheres of everyday life.
But yet when an organization, or a cooperative of organizations, tries to break the monopoly on information, it's often the masses which attack these very organizations and claim disdain for their activities. The lies and innuendoes about Wikileaks, and the nature of the free flow of information, are contemporary examples of how quickly people become disenchanted with the notion of freedom.
The number of bloggers, pundits and journalists who have cut and pasted unsubstantiated truths about Wikileaks is astounding. It's the spamming by well known or unheard of internet addresses against Wikileaks that clog the search results with their scoops. Take a look at the accusations that Wikileaks is connected to either Mossad, the CIA, Soros or all of them.
By putting Wikileaks Mossad in the search field on Google.com, the first hit on 18 February 2011 was for a blog on The Telegraph in England. The title of the entry read Is Wikileaks a Front for the CIA or Mossad? The reason the blogger asked the question was because the blog's writer had just heard an unnamed Iranian analyst during an undisclosed interview on Al Jazeera say that Wikileaks had to be a front for these organizations given the nature of the diplomatic cables which discredit "the region’s leaders and Iran in particular."
And if you read the blog entry you'll find that the blogger never goes on to directly accuse Wikileaks of Mossad connections, but the perception constructed through an evocative title remains a top hit on the number one search engine.
Next on the list of results was the Pakistan Daily. It claimed that according to unidentified Asian intelligence sources "there is a strong belief in some Asian countries, particularly China and Thailand, that ... Wikileaks ... is linked to U.S. cyber-warfare ... as well as to Mossad’s ... activities." The article went on to say that John Young, who runs Cryptome.org, "left Wikileaks, claiming the operation was a CIA front" - more on this later.
The third hit was from Veterans Today and stated Wikileaks was a Mossad front, not because a source had provided information reporting such, but as a result of the writer's opinion after having read the material Wikileaks or its partners had published to date (29 July 2010). In the writer's view “... 'Wiki-Leaks' is busy selling phony bin Laden stories, having the long dead Osama humiliating the CIA by running around villages in Afghanistan selling vacuum cleaners. ... When you read Mr. Assange’s output, you are looking at one of the Mossad games, nothing more. ..."
When instead I searched under Wikileaks Soros, I immediately found the Huffington Post citing Glenn Beck (an American conservative radio and television host) who had been interviewed on the O'Reilly Factor (Fox News). According to the article, "... 'Assange', Beck said, 'loves to have just all-open society. Sound familiar?' O'Reilly picked up the reference to Soros' Open Society Institute. ..." Beck then goes on to say, "... I know Assange is being represented by the attorney who does the pro bono work for George Soros' Open Society Institute ..." [ Personally I'm not able to confirm or deny the association through my searches. ]
I could go on, but the point is mostly that the accusations are innuendo repeated over and over again (cut and paste) from unnamed sources, misstated views, unsubstantiated claims and personal opinions that the material isn't spicy enough (which for many means nothing juicy about Israel). And the two major sources most claim the so-called facts came from are two people who were associated with Wikileaks in one way or another. John Young of Cryptome is frequently credited on internet as the source for the CIA and Soros connections. While Daniel Domscheit-Berg, the former Wikileaks' spokesperson, is credited as the source for the Mossad connection.
I contacted Mr Young regarding Wikileaks' connection to the CIA. His comment was :
On 2/18/11, John Young wrote : "I have tried on numerous occasions ... that the link between WL, Soros and the CIA has been misconstrued if it is traced to my remarks included in the two postings of the WL private mail list. I used such links as metaphorical examples, and both are so commonplace insults and jokes only a fool believes them. Assange has also joked about them according to press reports. There are much more dangerous associations than those two.
This is not to deny there is no link to either or both, only that I never stated that, and have posted messages on Cryptome denying it in the same terms I use here. The claim is a canard if not a hoary joke, like links to KGB, MI6, Mossad and ilk forever being bruited by fanners of flame, fame and infamy, not least by the perfidious agencies themselves. ... "
Secondly, in regard to the Pakistan Daily reference that Mr Young had left Wikileaks, Young stated on 2/18/11 :
1. My agreed role in Wikileaks was limited to allowing my name to be used as registrant for the domain name (I have done this for several parties who wished to conceal their identity). This request came from an anonymous person.
2. I was subsequently placed on a private mail list without being asked. I offered comments there.
3. An unknown person posted a message on that mail list suggesting a target of up to $5 million dollars to be raised in 6 months. I objected to that stating that such a sum of money could only come that quickly from an organization like Soros or the CIA.
4. I also suggested a slow build-up of credibility before soliciting funds.
5. After contentious debate I was summarily unsubscribed from the mail list after I said I would publish the mail list contents, which I did.
6. There was little contact with Wikileaks for several years except for being sent an archive of its holdings during a period when it was under threat to be shut down.
The connection to Mossad has frequently been reported as coming from a supposed interview Mr Domscheit-Berg did with Lia Abramovitch, an Israeli-born investigative journalist (?), representing SyriaTruth. [ The best article I found clearly citing her as the source of the suggested connection between Wikileaks and Mossad can be read at The European Union Times. ] Abramovitch reported Domscheit-Berg said that Julian Assange had received money from semi-official Israeli sources and promised them, in a 'secret, video-recorded agreement,' not to publish any document that may harm Israeli security or diplomatic interests. This claim, though, is denied by Domscheit-Berg in an authorized statement published by Cryptome with the headline Daniel Domscheit-Berg Denies Rumor of Assange-Israeli Deals.
"I have been notified about the general rumour a few weeks ago, and shortly after about the appearance of me as involved in those allegations. I have never spoken to anyone at syriatruth or that reporter that is making these claims, nor do I know anything about any deals JA has allegedly made with Israelis. ..."
It is said that the ignorant are blessed. Some would say they're doomed. In this world of illusions we hope to understand, but often times our hope is undone by our ignorance. Wikileaks may very well be a psyops run by some group(s) whose objective is to disenfranchise the general population from any hope of achieving knowledge of their world. But regardless of what Wikileaks is, it opened a door to a forum where people now discuss the notion of the free flow of information in society. Whether that door closes or opens further is up to the rest of us.