Wednesday, October 27, 2010

"Whistleblower?" Czar Julian Assange: 9/11 was NOT a Conspiracy

Founder of Wikileaks Julian Assange has become the pin-up of web-age investigative journalists

Julian Assange's comments regarding 9/11 stick out like a sore thumb given that this "whistleblowers' whistleblower" is now feted with the title of "the most dangerous man alive". The reality is that the CIA could nullify the threat posed by Assange and his operation any which way it wants. Assange dismissing 9/11 as a "false conspiracy" strongly suggests that that hasn't happened yet because he is useful to the PTB in the form of controlled opposition. WikiLeaks is beginning to look like a Protocol 12 operation on steroids.

Protocol 12, Control of the Press - Protocols of the Pathocrats
In the front rank will stand organs of an official character. They will always stand guard over our interests, and therefore their influence will be comparatively insignificant. 
In the second rank will be the semi-official organs, whose part it will be to attack the tepid and indifferent. 
In the third rank we shall set up our own, to all appearance, opposition, which, in at least one of its organs, will present what looks like the very antipodes to us. Our real opponents at heart will accept this simulated opposition as their own and will show us their cards.


We have to wonder now if Bradley Manning, the unfortunate US soldier who showed his cards by sending Wikileaks the murderous helicopter gunship video (an everyday occurrence throughout the US occupation of Iraq) and is now facing indefinite incarceration, has been set up as an example to other potential military whistleblowers: dissent and we will have you 'extraordinarily renditioned' then lock you away for good.


Related
Wiki "Leaks" - The final word?

WIKILEAKS/WIKIPEDIA: TRUTH serving LIES (with CIA/MOSSAD oversight)




Julian Assange tells Matthew Bell why governments fear Wikileaks | The Independent 

July 18, 2010


There are not many journalists who, when you ask them if they are being followed by the CIA, say "We have surveillance events from time to time." Actually it's not a question I've ever asked before, and Julian Assange does not call himself a journalist.
But the answer is typical of this 41-year-old former computer-hacker: cryptic, dispassionate, and faintly self-important.

As the founder of Wikileaks - a website that publishes millions of documents, from military intelligence to internal company memos and has, in four years, exposed more secrets than many newspapers have in a century - Assange has become the pin-up of web-age investigative journalists. The US has wanted him for questioning since March, after he posed a video showing an American helicopter attack that left several Iraqi civilians and two Reuters journalists dead.

Understandably, he now avoids the US, and keeps his movements secret, though it's thought he operates out of Sweden and is spending time in Iceland, where a change in the law is creating a libel-free haven for journalists. But if the CIA spooks wanted him that badly, couldn't they have turned up, as a hundred adoring student journalists did, to hear him talk at the Centre for Investigative Journalism 10 days ago?

Perhaps it's just as well they didn't, as Assange is not a natural public speaker. He is more at home trawling data or decrypting the codes that mask it. His philosophy is that the more a government wants to keep something secret, the more reason to expose it.

No journalist could argue with his essential belief in shining a light on malpractice, but shouldn't governments be entitled to keep some secrets? "Sure," he says when we speak after his talk, "That doesn't mean we and other press organizations should suffer under coercion."

What if publishing a document would threaten national security? "This phrase is so abused. Dick Cheney justified torture with it. Give me an example." What about the movement of US troops? Would he publish a document that jeopardized their safety? "We'd have to think about it." So that's a yes? "It's not a yes. If that fit into our editorial criteria - which it might, if it was an extremely good movement - then we'd have to look at whether that needed a harm minimization procedure. We'd be totally happy to consider jeopardizing the initiation of a war, or the action of war. Absolutely."

He may speak like a robot, and have a politician's knack at ducking straight answers, but in the flesh he could be a forgotten member of Crowded House, all ripped jeans and crumpled jacket, his distinguished white hair framing a youthful face. His grungy look ties in with his outsider status: he has a deep-rooted mistrust of authority. It has been speculated this comes from a youthful brush with the family courts after he divorced the mother of his son, though little is really known about his early life.

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."

Assange likes to see Wikileaks as a neutral platform for distributing information, and fends off criticism by saying it always follows its openly stated policies. But no news organisation is free from personal input, as he reveals when talking of Bilderberg, a shadowy annual conference of the influential. "I understand the philosophical rationale for having Chatham House rules among people in power, but the corrupting nature, in the case of Bilderberg, probably outweighs the benefits. When powerful people meet together in secret, it tends to corrupt."

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. 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."

After we talk, he is off to a safe house for the night and after that, who knows? He never stays in one place more than two nights. Is that because the CIA wants to kill him? "Is it in the CIA's interest to assassinate me? Maybe. But who would do it?" Isn't he brave to appear in public? "Courage is an intellectual mastery of fear," he says. "It's not that you don't have fear, you just manage your risks intelligently."

Source: http://www.sott.net/articles/show/212302-Wanted-by-the-CIA-The-man-who-keeps-no-secrets

6 comments:

  1. I have worked for MSM and believe me- NO ONE gets the coverage Assange gets unless it abets the PTB agenda. That this sayan posing as a rebel has nothing on IDF or Israel crimes is in itself informative.

    His dismissal of 911 Truth is the capstone on this liar's charade. Buyer Beware!

    ReplyDelete
  2. A bit of Illuminati translation: Note the seal of the cyber dept forming a halo effect around his head- like they did with Obam-bam and the Great Seal of the USA all during his campaign (till it peremptorily dropped off his podium recently while he spoke).

    Is this for real or photoshopped to illustrate this article?

    LOLOL. This creature of the NWO is hilarious!!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Exactly that, photoshopped to illustrate the article - adding the cyber command as a halo such as obama and other media puppets, using wikileaks' colors as the backdrop and the DoD's "information awareness office" lapel button to boot.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Julian Assange's comments regarding 9/11 stick out like a sore thumb given that this "whistleblowers' whistleblower" is now feted with the title of "the most dangerous man alive". The reality is that the CIA could nullify the threat posed by Assange and his operation any which way it wants. Assange dismissing 9/11 as a "false conspiracy" strongly suggests that that hasn't happened yet because he is useful to the PTB in the form of controlled opposition.

    BINGO!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I wouldn’t consider Julian Assange a hero, but I do think we need more ppl like him. Yes, I’m well aware of the compromises in safety that reckless leaking of classified information entails, but I view it as a necessary evil. The nature of a government is to control and regulate, and doing so unchecked will only lead to totalitarianism and corruption. As a government gets more powerful, subverting it only gets more difficult. With a gov as powerful as ours, we should be thankful that there are people out there that are able to (let alone willing to) undermine such an entrenched institution, imo. And to the people that say “oh, there are political channels that you can about to change the gov,” no, not really. There may be ways on paper that sound like they’d work in theory, but this country’s government is not controlled in any way shape or form by the will of the people. How do you think any real change has ever happened? It wasn’t by peacefully playing the government’s own legal game and getting a proposition voted on. How do you think blacks and women got the right to vote with the 15th and 19th amendments? Thousands of them violently protested and were arrested before this could happen… not because they’re criminally insane or terrorists, but because going about it in a civil manner simply does not work with our government. Besides, finding a politically correct method of subversion is impossible, since the act itself can’t be considered politically correct to an entire populace with varying ideologies. And it’s not even like leaking this information is compromising any lives… it’s not like he’s leaking military strategies and locations. I don’t think leaked cables of one country’s diplomats talking shit on another country’s ones is putting too many lives at risk. If anything, military bases should step up their security and firewalls… I’ve seen their “home security” myself (linked is a picture of how “secure” our military data centers look). Pretty much anyone with a usb drive can walk on in there and email it to wikileaks…

    ReplyDelete
  6. 911 is so obviously inside job like a spain bombings exactly 911days after ny...
    what a orchestrated and well planned mission by a group of lunatics that got a hold of power inside institutions of a "greatest democracy" in the world...
    or maiby we r the lunatics to believe in those acts?!?

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...