02-04-2010, 03:13 PM
Helen
I've had a number of brief contacts with John Young over the past 4-5 years. Mainly helping Craig Murray guarantee his stuff got published whatever the UK authorities did. I recall one exchange with wikileaks too where an exchange of emails was needed for them to put Murray's uncensored version of his book up. I didn't mean to imply that there is animosity between John and Wikileaks. Personally I very much doubt there is. He doesn't do 'animosity' he simply tells it as he sees it. He is totally unconcerned about competition and advocates as many competing (or cooperating whistle-blower type operations as possible. He's just a crotchety old sceptic about anything and everything that's all - and I mean that affectionately. He certainly posed the question himself - but in the same fashion as he would pose it about the motives of anyone appearing to seek publicity and funds.
Wikileaks can certainly be 'turned' or at the very least become a patsy or unwitting conduit for disinfo - I guess we all can.
On balance I think their motivation is probably sound and as claimed - but what the hell do I know?
I can also understand the claims reported as coming from China and Burma etc because the information they've published about them is vast.
I've had a number of brief contacts with John Young over the past 4-5 years. Mainly helping Craig Murray guarantee his stuff got published whatever the UK authorities did. I recall one exchange with wikileaks too where an exchange of emails was needed for them to put Murray's uncensored version of his book up. I didn't mean to imply that there is animosity between John and Wikileaks. Personally I very much doubt there is. He doesn't do 'animosity' he simply tells it as he sees it. He is totally unconcerned about competition and advocates as many competing (or cooperating whistle-blower type operations as possible. He's just a crotchety old sceptic about anything and everything that's all - and I mean that affectionately. He certainly posed the question himself - but in the same fashion as he would pose it about the motives of anyone appearing to seek publicity and funds.
Wikileaks can certainly be 'turned' or at the very least become a patsy or unwitting conduit for disinfo - I guess we all can.
On balance I think their motivation is probably sound and as claimed - but what the hell do I know?
I can also understand the claims reported as coming from China and Burma etc because the information they've published about them is vast.
Peter Presland
".....there is something far worse than Nazism, and that is the hubris of the Anglo-American fraternities, whose routine is to incite indigenous monsters to war, and steer the pandemonium to further their imperial aims"
Guido Preparata. Preface to 'Conjuring Hitler'[size=12][size=12]
"Never believe anything until it has been officially denied"
Claud Cockburn
[/SIZE][/SIZE]
".....there is something far worse than Nazism, and that is the hubris of the Anglo-American fraternities, whose routine is to incite indigenous monsters to war, and steer the pandemonium to further their imperial aims"
Guido Preparata. Preface to 'Conjuring Hitler'[size=12][size=12]
"Never believe anything until it has been officially denied"
Claud Cockburn
[/SIZE][/SIZE]