Monday, July 26, 2010

Media Pimps and Info Whores

A recent foray into godlikeproductions was rewarded with a tidbit of information which seemed to support our initial suspicions concerning the revelations of the 90,000 (!?) government/military documents by Wikileaks currently on view at The Guardian, The New York Times, The Huffington Post etc...and being touted in most reverential and worshipful tones as the GREATEST INTEL LEAK IN HISTORY! Stratfor has this pithy comment on the mostly unsurprising nature of the extensive data.

"So, this was either low-grade material hyped by the media, or there is material reviewed by the selected newspapers but not yet made public. Still, what was released and what the Times discussed is consistent with what most thought was happening in Afghanistan."

It appears that Julian Assange, grunge-hacker extraordinaire, made some interesting assertions concerning the events of 9/11, during his recent cross-continent hegira supposedly to avoid capture by unnamed US intelligence agencies for the release of now famous classified video footage "Collateral Murder" of the brutal murder of a foreign journalist and his driver as well as several anonymous and unfortunate Iraqis accompanying them, and attempting to recover the bodies.

His obsession with secrecy, both in others and maintaining his own, lends him the air of a conspiracy theorist. Is he one? "I believe in facts about conspiracies," he says, choosing his words slowly. "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. Generally, when there's enough facts about a conspiracy we simply call this news." 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."

Read more:

thanks for that, anonymous coward

Besides being apparently pursued by various spooks and government agents, Assange has been embroiled by controversies concerning financial irregularities within his own organization as well as accusations of reneging on a promise for financial and legal support for 22 year old SPC Bradley Manning, Army Intelligence Analyst, the source of the "Collateral Murder" video and currently under arrest. Assange claims his attempts to secure legal representation for Manning have been stonewalled by the Army, a charge which an Army spokesman has denied.

Via PGPboard, 14 June 2010:

Cryptome published the following:-

Quote [From: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/conscience/]

He said that Julian Assange had offered him (Manning) a position at Wikileaks. But he said,” I’m not interested right now. Too much excess baggage.”


There will never be any transcripts of Manning's communications with Assange. The issue here is that Assange and Manning (the primary source of Wikileaks Iraq and Afghanistan leaks) hoped to jointly profit by selling some of the data by auction to interested news and media organisations such as AFP, Reuters and CNN, and several British daily newspapers.

Assange will throw Manning to the dogs. As we speak, Assange will not accept any communications from Manning. Manning will be hung out to dry in order to cover Assange’s ass.

A Wikileaks Insider

Internal estimates here at WIKILEAKS indicate that in the last 18 months Assange has been responsible for in excess of $225,000 of expenditures without receipts or any form of control or authorization.

How can we expect to obtain funding, without being transparent about our finances and expenditures?

The probability is that the taxman will catch up with Assange before the Feds do.

Here at WIKILEAKS we can only hope for a major donor who will provide us with funding, AND insist upon correct and transparent account procedures in the use and disbursement of donor funding.

Assange should step aside now.... http://cryptome.org/0001/wikileaks-mess.htm

Assange's stance on 9/11 puts him squarely in the camp of such left gate-keepers as Ford Foundation shill Amy Goodman, Henry Kissinger protégé Noam Chomsky, and Norman Solomon, founder/director of the Institute of Public Accuracy. The seminal events of 9/11 and the subsequent revelations of what has come to be widely accepted as perhaps the mother of all "conspiracies" in the broadest sense of the term leaves one wondering why such "radical" and high profile "activists" maintain a professed indifference or well studied ignorance for such an impressive and irrefutable body of evidence of a broad and massive conspiracy reaching into the highest levels of government. The answer lies in the very secret cabals from which emanate the blueprints, the architecture, and the design of such "false flag " events as 9/11. Let's take Mr. Chomsky, the ascended master of the left guardians. The following from the inveterate journalist/investigator Daniel Estulin is most instructive in establishing the MIT linguistics professor's interesting pedigree.

"By far the most influential player in the Watergate Crisis was Nixon's National Security Adviser-Henry Kissinger. As far back as the mid-1960s, the Bilderbergers placed Kissinger in charge of a small group consisting of James Schlesinger, Alexander Haig and Daniel Ellsberg. Working with them was the Institute of Policy Studies chief theoretician, Noam Chomsky. While the IPS was the brainchild of the British Roundtable, the Tavistock Institute determined its agenda, and together they developed programmed-learning techniques. In the '60s, Kissinger's team and Chomsky were creating the "New Left" as a grassroots movement in the US to engender strife and unrest. Their goal was to spread chaos and to proliferate the "ideals" of nihilistic socialism. From this they could engineer the "big stick" with which to beat the United States political establishment."

Interestingly enough, Assange lists Chomsky as a member of his "informal board of advisers", along with some others of interesting note, most notably security expert Ben Laurie, director of the Apache Software foundation.

"WikiLeaks advisory board," complete with unwitting members. Lefty intellectual Noam Chomsky, security expert Ben Laurie and a former representative of the Dalai Lama, Tashi Namgyal Khamsitsang, all told Mother Jones they gave no permission for use of their names. Assange defended himself by saying the board was "pretty informal."

One of the names mentioned by Estulin is finding quite a bit of currency and press coverage concerning the GREATEST INTEL LEAK IN HISTORY! And that of course is Daniel Ellsberg, another famous "leaker" who earlier this month had expressed dark and confidential reservations concerning the safety of our erstwhile cyber punk savior Julian Assange, even going so far as to caution Assange from entering the US. Most probably these "conspiratorial" utterances were scripted for the sensational appeal alone and ordered up strictly for mass consumption much like the entire WikiLeaks episode, as our astute video commentator (above) has already informed us. In other words there are external clandestine agencies which, through the application of technologically advanced media manipulation, control the US government and its largely operantly conditioned masses to accept not only pre-arranged social, economic, and political programs designed for their own devious exploitation but also the convenient and acceptable mythologies concocted beforehand to ensure that such techniques remain largely subliminal and unconscious and thus unamenable to conscious scrutiny.

Aside from the labyrinthine house of mirrors which comprises the puzzle palace erected by these disinformation specialists and/or intelligence agency operatives, another mistaken assumption is the equation which Mr. Assange and so many others of his ilk, inextricably bound in the web of cyberspace, make between knowledge and information. In this respect they have become mere images of the electronically pulsating screens which they incessantly stare into day after day; myopic, two-dimensional, inert receptors of information which can be installed, uploaded and downloaded to largely neutral neural interfaces devoid of imaginative cognition.

1 comment:

George said...

wow that's dissappointing.