Ed Jewett Wrote:Daniel Ellsberg Exposed Along with the Real Purpose of the Wikileaks Psyop

Posted on December 5, 2010 by willyloman
by Scott Creighton
UPDATE: (at end of article)
UPDATE 2: (at end of article)
Daniel Ellsberg has been running around singing the praises of Julian Assange ever since his first big-time leak, the Collateral Damage video, which showed a U.S. gunship killing various unarmed civilians in Iraq two of whom happened to be reporters. With the recent pile of “leaked” state department memos, Ellsberg can’t hardly take a breath between interviews and round table discussions, where he is the primary focus and a staunch supporter of everything Wikileaks.
But there is something rotten in Denmark, folks.
It’s not a stretch to say that most Americans don’t believe a thing that comes out of the state department or the government in general for that matter. Confidence in the word of our elected (and unelected) leaders must be at or near an all-time low. If you think this fact is lost on the PR (propaganda) experts working on contracts for the various branches of government, guess again. Mark Penn of Burson-Marsteller gained all of his access to power (and considerable wealth) by being a gifted and relentless pollster. He was able to put his finger directly on the pulse of the public at large and this made him invaluable to corrupt politicians and corporations everywhere. Penn is still deeply connected with the Clinton regime having run her campaign in 2008.
So what do you do when you want to feed the generally left-leaning public a pack of lies given that you know most of them are extremely skeptical about everything you tell them? Well, if “you” are the problem, then you take the “you” out of the equation.
Get someone else to tell them the lies. Someone they are conditioned to trust.
It’s a pretty simple plan: give the leaker something dramatic (but already well-known) to get attention and build his credibility, prime the pot with promises of massive amounts of ”secret” documents that will reveal “the truth”, see to it that they are published in the biggest news papers on the planet, put on a big show about how much you don’t want him to reveal “the truth”, and make damn sure you have enough “progressive” figures to run around doing interviews praising the leaker for his courage and committment to getting “the truth” out there no matter how grave the threat to his personal safety.
If you really examine the meat of the “leaked” documents, it doesn’t take long to notice that generally speaking they strongly support every single state department agenda, from invading Pakistan, regime change in North Korea, regime change in Iran, and supporting the role that Israel is playing in destabilizing the Middle East. And what have we learned that harms the state department? That Obama gave the orders to fire missiles into Yemen that killed 21 kids? We knew that the day it happened and we certainly knew that after the recent UN report came out which clearly identified the parts of those rockets as ours. We learned that the state department works closely with the CIA, but we knew that already as well. We learned that Hillary Clinton gave the order to spy on people, as if that is news of any kind. In short, we didn’t learn anything new that harms the state department, with the possible exception that Hillary wanted someone to steal the head of the U.N.’s credit card numbers.
In the near future, these “leaked’ documents will help build the pre-text for the narrative that we have to force regime change on various targeted nations. They will be referenced in articles written by war mongers in the same MSM news papers who were fed the “leaks” in the first place. When that happens, and it will, we won’t be able to question their validity, because frankly, we don’t question them now. Imagine Dick Cheney’s forged “Yellow Cake from Niger” document being ”leaked” by Wikileaks and praised by the likes of Daniel Ellsberg, Amy Goodman, and Glenn Greenwald… imagine that and you start to get the picture.
You see, it doesn’t work without the amen chorus. Just like 9/11 would never have worked without all the media talking heads reading from the exact same script and endlessly repeating “bin Laden” and “al Qaeda” as the buildings were demoed, the same principle holds true here. It’s so obvious that these “leaks” do nothing more than support the Obama regime’s imperial agenda, if given half a minute to step back and consider their merit on mere fact alone, the truth is pretty obvious. It’s as obvious as Building 7.
But the amen chorus is out there singing the praises of Wikileaks just as fast and as hard as they can, hoping to create an emotional connection between Assange and the anti-war left. And Daniel Ellsberg is key to that. Whether he actually knows it or not.
In a recent interview with Brad Friedman or Bradblog, Ellsberg tipped his hand and from this moment, the truth of Ellsberg’s role in the Wikileaks psyop can easily be exposed for all to see. All who want to that is.
Friedman was talking with Ellsberg about the Wikileaks disclosures and specifically he came to start talking about what Assange had said about firing Hillary Clinton for ordering her staff in the state department to spy on the United Nations. Ellsberg’s comments are quite remarkable and I will let them speak for themselves…

But, as Ellsberg revealed during my interview with him on Wednesday, he disagrees with Assange on at least one point in regard to the latest round of documents released by the controversial organization. Unlike Assange, Ellsberg does not believe Hillary Clinton needs to resign.
… During my on-air interview with him Wednesday, when I asked about that point and whether he agrees with Assange’s assessment, he was direct in his response: “In a word, no,” he told me.
… “In a way, I would have to say as a former insider here, he has far too idealistic and romantic a notion of what it means to be Secretary of State or a high official in the U.S. Government — and really any government. Among the various illegalities, the various recklessness and so forth, shown by our policies, this one is indeed illegal, but it’s not high on the list. Probably all countries do it to a large extent.”
… While Ellsberg strongly condemns the Obama Administration for its failure to hold members of the Bush Administration accountable for “war crimes” and “torture” and for escalating a number of “aggressive wars” the U.S. continues to pursue, he reiterated that he doesn’t believe the disclosures to date rise to serious enough crimes to merit Clinton’s resignation.
… “Everybody involved in aggressive war in Iraq should be prosecuted as a war criminal,” he said. “Obama didn’t get us into Iraq or Aghanistan, though he certainly escalated it. But I’m not sure if it’s criminal.” Brad Friedman

So not only does our respected ”progressive” hero, Daniel Ellsberg, breathlessly support the “truthiness” of the Wikileaks psyops, he is also promoting the idea that Hillary Clinton’s crimes don’t rise to the level of something that she should be held accountable for. After all, all politicians commit crimes and certain ones just have to be accepted as par for the course. Personally, I don’t buy Ellsberg’s argument that since former Secretaries of State committed crimes and got away with it, so too should we afford the same luxury to Hillary Clinton.
Remarkably, Ellsberg also asserts that Obama is probably not guilty of war crimes in the continuation and escalation of the obviously criminal occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Currently anti-war sites are taking up a collection for Assange (just like last time when he came out with the Collateral Damage video) in order to get his site back up and running. The way I see it, that would be like seeing a donations button for Scooter Libby on World Can’t Wait’s website.
You have to give it to the Clinton regime at the state department. It’s a pretty slick PR campaign and it appears, at least for the time being, to be working. Ironically, the man who helped bring an end to the Vietnam war is inadvertently helping set the stage for the next one while the antiwar activist websites are steadily promoting the propaganda. Gotta hand it to Clinton and her PR team; that’s slick.
Of course, it could never work without the amen chorus and their featured soloist, Daniel Ellsberg.
I just want you all too remember that in 6 months when they are using Wikileaks disclosures to help justify the invasion of Iran and the deaths of thousands more of our service men and women and perhaps a million more civilians in the Middle East.
————-
UPDATE: If you want a clear cut example of what I am talking about, go here to a CNN video of Fareed Zakaria explaining how the Wikileaks documents actually makes him feel better about the state department.

1. The leaks don’t show the state department doing anything nafarious.
“In these cables there are no stories of coups or attempted assasinations or secret deals.”
2. A transparent U.S. diplomacy
3. Astue American Envoys
“I have to confess that the level and quality of analysis in these cables is a lot better than I would have guessed.
4. Arab Leaders Fear Iran
“They have been urging Washington to do something about Iran including using military force.”
“The cables make clear that far from being loved in the region as he claims, he is feared and despised.”
“But reading through the sum total of this data dump, I came away more impressed and reasured by the way Washington works, or at least the state department, then I was before.” Fareed Zakaria, CNN

UPDATE 2: Julian wants you to send donations to his mergers and aquisitions law firm in London.

“Dear ***,
As you may have heard I am facing arrest in the United Kingdom in relation to extradition attempts by Sweden and probably the US.
If this happens I will be stuck in solitary confinement during my defence unless I can raise the necessary funds for bail and representation.
I am reaching out to you in regard to this matter and I am also looking at support to defend our other WikiLeak people.
If you can assist or you know someone who could please contact me here or my solicitor Jennifer Robinson (——) of Finers Stephens Innocent LLP.” Julian Assange

So I looked up the law firm…

FSI is an extraordinarily high-profile law firm based in central London with a dynamic team of lawyers who advise national and international SMEs, property magnates, media conglomerates and successful individuals from all walks of life.
… Whilst we are proud to be smaller than some, we haven’t stinted in providing the full service support that counts when you are doing a major acquisition (tax and banking partners being an integrated part of the corporate and property teams) or a large dispute under tight timeframes. FSI website

Jennifer Robinson, his attorney, seems to be one of the very few attorneys at FSI that deals in human rights issues. Most seem to be corporate law or mergers specialists of some kind. In fact their listed areas of practice includes “corporate, property, commercial dispute resolution, employment, private client, family, and IP Media”, not civil rights litigation, trial, international human rights, or anything like that. Curious.

Peter Presland Wrote:76 mirrors to date - and counting.

Plus masses of static mirrors and other clever linking stuff here

I'm working at getting a live one up on the wikispooks server. Meanwhile I've put a banner link up on Wikispooks main page and will try to ensure it always links to a live site

They are going to have to hit the nuke button to stop this now

Carsten Wiethoff Wrote:From http://wlcentral.org/node/480

2010-12-04: NSW Supreme Court Solicitor Peter Kemp: Letter to Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard

Submitted by admin on Sat, 12/04/2010 - 04:09
By Peter Kemp, Solicitor of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, on 2010-12-04
Dear Prime Minister
From the Sydney Morning Herald I note you made a comment of "illegal" on the matter of Mr Assange in relation to the ongoing leaks of US diplomatic cables.
Previously your colleague and Attorney General the Honourable McClelland announced an investigation of possible criminality by Mr Assange.
As a lawyer and citizen I find this most disturbing, particularly so when a brief perusal of the Commonwealth Criminal Code shows that liability arises under the Espionage provisions, for example, only when it is the Commonwealth's "secrets" that are disclosed and that there must be intent to damage the Commonwealth.
Likewise under Treason law, there must be an intent to assist an enemy. Clearly, and reinforced by publicly available material such as Professor Saul's excellent article:
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/dont-cry-over-wikil...
...Julian Assange has almost certainly committed no crime under Australian law in relation to his involvement in Wikileaks.
I join with Professor Saul also in asking you Prime Minister why has there been no public complaint to the US about both Secretaries of State Condaleeza Rice and Hillary Clinton being in major breach of International law ie UN Covenants, by making orders to spy on UN personnel, including the Secretary General, to include theft of their credit card details and communication passwords. Perhaps the Attorney General should investigate this clear prima facie evidence of crime (likely against Australian diplomats as well), rather than he attempts to prosecute the messenger of those crimes.
It is also disturbing that no Australian official has castigated Sweden for the shameful treatment Mr Assange has received ie his human rights abused, in that he has not been charged and served with papers in the English language regarding the evidence against him of alleged sexual offences. This is contrary to Article 6 of the European Covenant on Human Rights to which Sweden is a signatory nation.
Those offences remain unclear and the Swedish prosecutor Ms Ny appears to be making up the law as she wants. It appears now, by Ms Ny's interpretation that when consensual sex occurs but if a condom breaks, the male party is liable to 2 years imprisonment for sexual assault. All this information is publicly available.
An Australian citizen is apparently being singled out for "special treatment" Prime Minister. There are legitimate concerns among citizens here that his treatment by the Swedes is connected to US interests which are against the activities of Wikileaks, and you will note the strident, outrageous (and illegal) calls inciting violence against him in the US in demands for his assassination, by senior influential US politicians.
Granted that in western political circles, Mr Assange is not flavour of the month, but what he is doing in my opinion, and in the opinion of many here and abroad, is vitally necessary to expose American foreign policy failures and potential war crimes and crimes against humanity--not for the purpose of damaging US interests but to make them accountable.
While we have close and a good relationship with the US, there is no doubt that US influence and power is declining. That we appear to be still posturing, (given that declining power and a new paradigm of privately enforced accountability) to the US on the issue of Wikileaks is, Prime Minister, deeply disappointing.
Yours Faithfully
Peter Kemp.
(Readers are encouraged contact the Australian Prime Minister here: http://www.pm.gov.au/PM_Connect/Email_your_PM)
Update: Darren Bailey, Solicitor of the Supreme Court of South Australia, has written a letter to the Australian Prime Minister in support of Peter Kemp's argument.


I say: Bravo Mr. Kemp!

Quote:WikiLeaks US embassy cables: live updates
• Cables reveal key infrastructure and potential terror targets
• Qatar accused of using al-Jazeera as tool of diplomacy
• Saudi Arabia seen as cash machine for terror
• Full coverage of the WikiLeaks cables
This page will update automatically every minute: On | Off

WikiLeaks has been blocked from being accessed by federal employees of the US, because the files are still seen as classified. Photograph: Thomas Coex/AFP/Getty Images
11.09am: The Yemeni government faces some awkward questions later this week about why it lied about US attacks against al-Qaida.

"We'll continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours," Yemen's president Ali Abdullah Saleh told David Petraeus in a now infamous cable in January this year.

Yemen's parliament will question the deputy prime minister over the cables, MPs told Reuters.

Rashad al-Alimi, Deputy Prime Minister for Security and Defence Affairs, has been asked to attend parliament on Wednesday to discuss the content of the secret U.S. documents, several MPs confirmed.

A government official told Reuters Alimi would go to parliament to answer parliamentarians' questions, but said the information in the leaked documents were inaccurate.

"Of course this (information in the cables) is not true. Everyone in the world is complaining about the inaccuracies of these documents," he said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

10.36am:Vancouver police have been asked by a lawyer to investigate whether a former aide to the Canadian prime minister broke the law when he called for the assassination of Julian Assange.

Last week Tom Flanagan, called for a contract killing against the WikiLeaks founder in a live TV discussion. He later said he regretted the remark.

Gail Davidson, a co-founder of the group Lawyers Against the War, has made a formal complaint to the police in Canada, according to the Vancover Sun.

In his online chat with Guardian readers last Friday Assange said those who called for his killing should be charged with incitement to murder.

10.23am: This is a useful - a search engine for all the hundreds of cables already published by WikiLeaks. You can use it to see what everyone else is searching for too.

9.58am: While US students have been told to that reading the cables could harm their careers, students in Indian are being told the opposite. Trainee diplomats at India's Foreign Services Institute (FSI) to emulate the prose style displayed by the diplomats in the cables.

"The Ministry of External Affairs is asking its youngsters to read them [the cables] and get a hang of the brevity with which thoughts and facts have been expressed," the Indian Express reports.

I'd recommend cables written by former US ambassador in Moscow William Burns, especially this one about a drunken wedding in Dagestan.

The cable is described as an "insightful, literate, and wry field report" by Reuel Marc Gerecht in the New Republic. He also likes the cables by Tatinian Gfoeller, the ambassador to Kyrgystan who reported on Prince Andrew's rudeness.

9.39am: The Guardian took a weekend break from live blogging the cables, but The Nation didn't. They work harder in America. Here's Greg Mitchell's round up of Sunday's WikiLeaks news.

My colleague Peter Walker is working on a summary of the WikiLeak revelations from today and over the weekend. While we wait for that, the respected analyst, Juan Cole, has a round-up of the weekend's top 10 disclosures about the Middle East.

9.21am: More evidence that the release of the cable about the key infrastructure sites is being used as stick to beat WikiLeaks.

Here's a tweet from Times columnist David Aaronovitch.


I don't see how the strategic sites cable fits into J Assange's heroic rubric of disclosure. It looks more like like vandalism. #wikileaks

8.59am: The broadcaster Al-Jazeera has denied that it being used as a tool of Qatari diplomacy, as one of the cables claims.

In a statement it said:

"This is the US embassy's assessment, and it is very far from the truth. Despite all the pressure Al Jazeera has been subjected to by regional and international governments, it has never changed its bold editorial policies which remain guided by the principles of a free press."

8.49am: Much of the media continues to portray Julian Assange as a Bond villain holding the world to ransom.

Here's today's Daily Mail:

Julian Assange has distributed to fellow hackers an encrypted 'poison pill' of damaging secrets, thought to include details on BP and Guantanamo Bay.

He believes the file is his 'insurance' in case he is killed, arrested or the whistleblowing website is removed permanently from the internet.

The release of the "terror targets" plays into that view.

8.24am: The Today programme presenter Jim Naughtie is in all sorts of trouble after substituting a crucial letter in the surname of culture secretary Jeremy Hunt, and then corpsing his way through the headlines.


Before the gaffe Naughtie sneered at the Guardian's WikiLeaks coverage. In a review of the papers at 6.12am he sarcastically described today's Guardian's splash as "another story that will make us all fall off our chairs with astonishment".

8.06am: A new edition of the weekly German magazine Der Spiegel is published today with a slew of new stories from the cables.

The magazine, one of the five media organisations - including the Guardian - to have had early sight of the cables, focuses on what they reveal about the conflict in Iraq.

The Americans allowed themselves to get entangled in the Sunni-Shia conflict while being systematically outmaneuvered by the Iranians, according to 5,500 about the war and its aftermath.

It also looks at what the cables say about Xi Jingping, China's probable future leader and the inner workings of the Chinese Politburo.

In interview with the magazine, Prince Turki bin Faisal of Saudi Arabia, says US "credibility and honesty" has been damaged by the leaks. He describes the cables as "a hodgepodge of selectivity, inaccuracy, agenda pursuit, and downright disinformation."

7.45am: A second working week of WikiLeaking kicks off with yet more controversy. WikiLeaks has published a list of "critical infrastructure and key resources" across the world. The Times dubs it a "targets for terror" list.

The BBC's diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus also sees it as a potential hit list:

"If the US sees itself as waging a 'global war on terror' then this represents a global directory of the key installations and facilities - many of them medical or industrial - that are seen as being of vital importance to Washington," he writes.

He describes the cable as "probably the most controversial document yet from the Wikileaks".

Meanwhile, WikiLeaks continues to make ripples across the world. The Daily Beast tracks the personnel changes forced on the US diplomatic service by disclosures.

The Obama administration is planning a major reshuffling of diplomats, military officers, and intelligence operatives at US embassies around the world out of concern that WikiLeaks has made it impossible – if not dangerous – for many of the Americans to remain in their current posts, writes Philip Shenon.

"In the short run, we're almost out of business," a senior US diplomat told the Reuters news agency, according to a follow-up of the Daily Beast article in the Independent.

The fate of WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, continues to attract much attention. The New York Times reports that hundreds of WikiLeaks mirror sites have sprung up to prevent efforts to censor its disclosures. Similarly the Guardian reports on an online backlash to shut the site down.

Australia's attorney general, Robert McCelland, said that Australia would provide consular assistance to Assange if he returned to Australia. But at the same time he said his country was providing ''every assistance'' to US authorities in their investigation against WikiLeaks.

Here are the headlines from the Guardian's latest trawl through the cables:

• Al-Jazeera changed coverage to suit Qatari foreign policy
• Cables portray Saudi Arabia as a cash machine for terrorists
• Lebanon told allies of Hezbollah's secret network
• Brazil denied existence of Islamist militants
• WikiLeaks cables blame Chinese government for Google hacking

You can follow all of last week's disclosures and reaction on our live blogs on the cables. And for full coverage go to our US embassy cables page or follow our US embassy cable Twitter feed @GdnCables.