PDA

View Full Version : Good Article on holes in Wiki story: "WikiStinks"




sofia
12-01-2010, 04:05 PM
Wednesday, December 1, 2010WikiStink
by Susan Abulhawa at dissidentvoice.org


Over a quarter of a million diplomatic cables, marked – “secret” , “confidential”, or “unclassified” – to and from the US State Department have been “leaked” to the public, presumably by a whistleblower. On the surface, it seems like the sort of thing that restores power to the people. It arms us all with knowledge and reminds those in power that they must answer to the public.

Then you pause to think. And that’s when the holes in this narrative become obvious.
Although WikiLeaks claims to provide a counter balance to the decades of disinformation served up in heaps by the “old media”, it chose to allow the vetting of these documents by these same outlets. Other highly respected media outlets, like al Jazeera and various independent media, were excluded. I find that odd, for starters.

If we take a look at the content of the cables themselves, the most remarkable thing to come out of these secret and confidential memos is what they do not contain. Granted, only 290 have actually been released so far. But it seems far from a coincidence that nearly every cable to and from Arab states released thus far has to do with villainizing Iran and mum’s the word on most major diplomatic hooplas of the past few years.

Take for example the bombshell briefing by a senior military officers to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen earlier in the year. The team was dispatched by Commander General David Petraeus to brief the Pentagon on intelligence that Israeli intransigence in the peace process was jeopardizing American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and that America was perceived as weak, ineffectual, and unable to stand up to Israel. Such political commentary from the highest echelons of the military was unprecedented and when news of this briefing broke, you can bet there was a significant diplomatic flurry. Yet a simple search of Petraeus’ name in the cablegate database on the Guardian website only turns up cables indicating that Arab countries were eager for an attack on Iran, which coincidentally happens to bolster Israel’s drumming for more war.

You can’t even find Vice President Joe Biden’s name in the keyword search even though Israel’s announcement of the construction of more illegal Jewish-only settlements in East Jerusalem on the eve of Biden’s visit to Tel Aviv amounted to an epic public spanking of Obama. Subsequent statements from the White House were as harsh as America ever dares to be with Israel, although they did not approach Obama’s reported ire over the matter. Thus far, there is not a single cable on the matter.

If you search cables originating in Dubai, all you’ll find are those denouncing and accusing Iran in titles like “Arab states scorn ‘evil’ Iran”, “AbuDhabi favors action to prevent nuclear Iran”, or “Emiratis fret over Iranian meddling”. This is quite amazing considering that the biggest diplomatic crisis this year occurred after a senior Hamas leader was assassinated in Dubai. The evidence and the world’s collective finger pointed at the Mossad and several diplomatic fallouts ensued when it was confirmed that Israel had forged foreign passports of the hitmen. And yet, there is not a word about this in any of the cables released so far. Instead, everything referencing the UAE or originating from Dubai only discusses “evil Iran”, much like the cables referencing Gen. Petraeus.

The list goes on. For all of Israel’s well known subterfuge (to put it mildly) – their espionage against the US; their persistent requests for money, weapons, special favors, and political cover; their well documented crimes against Palestinians; their mafia tactics of assassinating leaders, intellectuals, and scientists across the globe; and their US-based powerful lobby, AIPAC, which was the center of an FBI investigation that found their senior officers passing sensitive and classified US intelligence to Israel – there is nothing referencing any of this in the memos to and from the US State Department in the cables thus far released.
Something else to note.

Someone with access to hundreds of thousands of classified communications and with the ability to move them without detection must have exceptionally high security clearance. He or she must be on the far upper end of the ladder. Why would individuals like that risk their careers, possibly their lives, just to embarrass the US, presumably their own country?

Whistleblowers tend to be people who obey the call of their conscience and moral codes to expose crimes and injustices committed. But there is nothing of the sort in this “leak”. Even more absurd is the notion that Manning, a soldier, leaked all these documents while in custody and under surveillance.
Finally, does anyone find it odd that while most world leaders are quietly bracing themselves for embarrassment and diplomatic repercussions, Benjamin Netanyahu is confidently speaking and gloating about how Saudia Arabia has urged attacking Iran? I sure do.

There are still thousands more cables to be reviewed and redacted by the good old boy network of ‘old media’ and I hope that the cables they release in the coming days and months will prove my suspicions moot. I’m willing to keep an open mind until we’ve seen the full leak. In the meantime, what we know so far does not add up and frankly smells rotten.


Susan Abulhawa is the author of Mornings in Jenin, a work of historic fiction. Read other articles by Susan, or visit Susan's website.

oyarde
12-01-2010, 04:10 PM
I noticed the evil Iran plan as well . al Jazeera exempted ? Iran probably is run by evil . I do not think we need to worry about them if we leave them alone .

ctiger2
12-01-2010, 04:11 PM
YouTube - CIA LEAKS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vr6C0Zrl6g)

vita3
12-01-2010, 04:12 PM
Good post.


Mossad also got a new chief on Monday, Tamir Pardo. The same day 2 Iranian Nuclear Scientist were attacked in Tehran.

squarepusher
12-01-2010, 04:15 PM
so you are saying because of the content of the Wikileaks does not further your agenda, it must be fake?

vita3
12-01-2010, 04:20 PM
I'm saying we all need to have our eyes wide open.

Everything the press throws @ us is usually b.s.

oyarde
12-01-2010, 04:23 PM
so you are saying because of the content of the Wikileaks does not further your agenda, it must be fake?

I suspect most of it will be accurate . Keep an open mind . I am nearly certain so far what is released has an evil , political agenda

BlackTerrel
12-01-2010, 09:33 PM
"WikiStinks" is pretty clever though... a lot of thought went into that one I'm sure.

steve005
12-01-2010, 10:19 PM
I have a feeling its the CIA or someone similar

jtstellar
12-02-2010, 02:46 AM
before i even read the actual content

let me guess.. it's a theory based on something have to do with israel

am i right

Imperial
12-02-2010, 02:47 AM
Although WikiLeaks claims to provide a counter balance to the decades of disinformation served up in heaps by the “old media”, it chose to allow the vetting of these documents by these same outlets.

Well yes, after being widely criticized for not redacting the names of those informing against people like the Taliban. Wikileaks doesn't have the staff to handle that type of task; mainstream news services do. It is a cooperative relationship.


Other highly respected media outlets, like al Jazeera and various independent media, were excluded. I find that odd, for starters.

How short of memories we have. Al Jazeera participated in the Iraq document dump. The LA Times (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2010/11/arab-world-wikileaks-gulf-iran-war.html) sums up their reluctance to cover this well:


Even the Qatar-based Al Jazeera, considered one of the most credible pan-Arab news outlets, tread lightly in its coverage and generally refrained from repeating the most incendiary quotes from the heads of neighboring states.

So what's next?


If we take a look at the content of the cables themselves, the most remarkable thing to come out of these secret and confidential memos is what they do not contain. Granted, only 290 have actually been released so far. But it seems far from a coincidence that nearly every cable to and from Arab states released thus far has to do with villainizing Iran and mum’s the word on most major diplomatic hooplas of the past few years.

Take for example the bombshell briefing by a senior military officers to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen earlier in the year. The team was dispatched by Commander General David Petraeus to brief the Pentagon on intelligence that Israeli intransigence in the peace process was jeopardizing American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and that America was perceived as weak, ineffectual, and unable to stand up to Israel. Such political commentary from the highest echelons of the military was unprecedented and when news of this briefing broke, you can bet there was a significant diplomatic flurry. Yet a simple search of Petraeus’ name in the cablegate database on the Guardian website only turns up cables indicating that Arab countries were eager for an attack on Iran, which coincidentally happens to bolster Israel’s drumming for more war.

So let us get this straight. Because 290/250000 of the cables do not mention this SINGLE scenario, it means that Wikileaks is hiding information negative to Israel. Based upon this 0.116% of documents (yes I did the math).


You can’t even find Vice President Joe Biden’s name in the keyword search even though Israel’s announcement of the construction of more illegal Jewish-only settlements in East Jerusalem on the eve of Biden’s visit to Tel Aviv amounted to an epic public spanking of Obama. Subsequent statements from the White House were as harsh as America ever dares to be with Israel, although they did not approach Obama’s reported ire over the matter. Thus far, there is not a single cable on the matter.

Again, one single event in cables that stretch mostly over a decade from among 0.116% of those released. Oh, and don't forget the fact that the way cables are being released is to keep the attention of the MSM- throw out a bunch of cables while having one or two big news items.


If you search cables originating in Dubai, all you’ll find are those denouncing and accusing Iran in titles like “Arab states scorn ‘evil’ Iran”, “AbuDhabi favors action to prevent nuclear Iran”, or “Emiratis fret over Iranian meddling”. This is quite amazing considering that the biggest diplomatic crisis this year occurred after a senior Hamas leader was assassinated in Dubai. The evidence and the world’s collective finger pointed at the Mossad and several diplomatic fallouts ensued when it was confirmed that Israel had forged foreign passports of the hitmen. And yet, there is not a word about this in any of the cables released so far. Instead, everything referencing the UAE or originating from Dubai only discusses “evil Iran”, much like the cables referencing Gen. Petraeus.

See above. Remember, the cables released highlight one big news item- it does not preclude other news items.


The list goes on. For all of Israel’s well known subterfuge (to put it mildly) – their espionage against the US; their persistent requests for money, weapons, special favors, and political cover; their well documented crimes against Palestinians; their mafia tactics of assassinating leaders, intellectuals, and scientists across the globe; and their US-based powerful lobby, AIPAC, which was the center of an FBI investigation that found their senior officers passing sensitive and classified US intelligence to Israel – there is nothing referencing any of this in the memos to and from the US State Department in the cables thus far released.
Something else to note.

Maybe it is in the 99.884% of documents that have not been released. Not to mention these statements are horridly one-sided, meant to pull out an emotional appeal without looking at the full context of a given situation.


Someone with access to hundreds of thousands of classified communications and with the ability to move them without detection must have exceptionally high security clearance. He or she must be on the far upper end of the ladder. Why would individuals like that risk their careers, possibly their lives, just to embarrass the US, presumably their own country?

This may be the best argument you have. But just like central planners are not omniscient, neither are amateur moles inside the US intelligence system. I think it is very plausible that he really didn't account for what he got himself into.



Whistleblowers tend to be people who obey the call of their conscience and moral codes to expose crimes and injustices committed. But there is nothing of the sort in this “leak”. Even more absurd is the notion that Manning, a soldier, leaked all these documents while in custody and under surveillance.

Has the author really followed the issue? Assange has been saying all along they had a lot more coming than just the Afghanistan, and then Iraq, leaks. It makes much more sense that Manning downloaded all of the information long before he was ever arrested.


Finally, does anyone find it odd that while most world leaders are quietly bracing themselves for embarrassment and diplomatic repercussions, Benjamin Netanyahu is confidently speaking and gloating about how Saudia Arabia has urged attacking Iran? I sure do.

When somebody gives you lemons, make lemonade. Netanyahu might as well embrace the moment that helps his agenda. Besides, we already know the US warned Israel before the release that they may suffer some embarassment, so I would bet there will be some nuggets in there as well.



There are still thousands more cables to be reviewed and redacted by the good old boy network of ‘old media’ and I hope that the cables they release in the coming days and months will prove my suspicions moot. I’m willing to keep an open mind until we’ve seen the full leak. In the meantime, what we know so far does not add up and frankly smells rotten.


Phail.

Flirple
12-02-2010, 03:10 AM
so you are saying because of the content of the Wikileaks does not further your agenda, it must be fake?

Exactly.

You just perfectly summarized the seductive appeal of grand-conspiratorial thinking and why so many people get drawn into them. Once someone starts viewing evidence against their theory as evidence FOR their theory it is really hard to reason with them. Everything that doesn't confirm their beliefs then becomes part of the ever expanding and non-falsifiable conspiracy theory. And anyone who doesn't understand that is a naive sheep!!!

jtstellar
12-02-2010, 03:14 AM
Exactly.

You just perfectly summarized the seductive appeal of grand-conspiratorial thinking and why so many people get drawn into them. Once someone starts viewing evidence against their theory as evidence FOR their theory it is really hard to reason with them. Everything that doesn't confirm their beliefs then becomes part of the ever expanding and non-falsifiable conspiracy theory. And anyone who doesn't understand that is a naive sheep!!!

i guess that's the upside of having at least *some* formal education.. much of it is useless but if you bothered enough in math and science, you still gain some logical processing ability at the bare minimum which some here desperately lack.

sofia
12-02-2010, 01:44 PM
Exactly.

You just perfectly summarized the seductive appeal of grand-conspiratorial thinking and why so many people get drawn into them. Once someone starts viewing evidence against their theory as evidence FOR their theory it is really hard to reason with them. Everything that doesn't confirm their beliefs then becomes part of the ever expanding and non-falsifiable conspiracy theory. And anyone who doesn't understand that is a naive sheep!!!

Cannot the same be said for those that swallow everything that the media feeds them....or, what I would call "grand-coincidental thinking"?

....For example....one who believes that "Arab terrorists" are the problem...will interpret all data from that perspective.

...and one believes that "Government terrorists" ...impersonating Arabs are the problem...will interpret all data from that perspective.


same thing....so dont get all high and mighty.

The question then becomes, who is standing on firm ground...the conspiratorialists...or the coincidentalists?

Who has accepted false premises and is therefore misreading data.

Given governments long history of KNOWN conspiratorial machinations....it appears that the "coincidence theorists" are the unreasonable ones here....and yes....dangerously naive.

Nate-ForLiberty
12-02-2010, 01:56 PM
YouTube - Adam VS The Man with Adam Kokesh (12/01/10) Ray McGovern: Assange is the Real Deal (1 of 8) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4I_CwU7sN8Y)

sofia
12-02-2010, 02:01 PM
YouTube - Adam VS The Man with Adam Kokesh (12/01/10) Ray McGovern: Assange is the Real Deal (1 of 8) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4I_CwU7sN8Y)

Assange is a fake....I dont care how many 'experts" come out of the woodwork who say otherwise.

When this dude starts "leaking" about Bildeberg meetings, CFR meetings, Fed meetings, 9/11 etc.......let me know :rolleyes:

The former head of the CFR (Richard Hass) was in Imus this morning...citing Wiki as confirmation that Iran and North Korea have to be dealt with..

Slutter McGee
12-02-2010, 02:31 PM
before i even read the actual content

let me guess.. it's a theory based on something have to do with israel

am i right

How on earth did you guess such a thing lol

Slutter McGee