I’d like to give you the range of opinion on Wikileaks so that you can see what is being said out there. To do that, I’ll reproduce some of the articles from what Jean Hudon calls his “document dump” on Wikileaks. Thanks to Jean for providing this range of opinions.
I mentioned yesterday that I was going through a metamorphosis in my interests. Having sat with it a day, I could today characterize it (in part) as a desire to leave behind the “terrestrial” discussion of events, which is at worst the blind leading the blind and at best the one-eyed man leading the blind. Our 3D view of events no longer interests me. I’m more interested now in the 5D view.
I could characterize the alternative commentary using Alfred Webre and Michael Salla’s term as “exopolitical.” That would draw on the views of 5D commentators like SaLuSa, Matthew, Saul, St. Germain, and Archangel Michael and advanced lightworkers like Drunvalo, Patricia Diane Cota Robles, and Lisa Renee. Oh, yes, and David Wilcock.
I’m not aware that there exists at the moment a body of commentary that actually knits together what 5D extraterrestrial, spiritual hierarchy and lightworker sources are saying about current events so this will be equivalent to beginning a new field of scholarship.
But, as a last hurrah to terrestrial or 3D discussion, this once I’ll give an overview of opinion on Wikileaks. After this, I’m specializing in the exopolitical and leaving those who cite only terrestrials to construe for themselves.
I offer five articles on Wikileaks: (1) from the opposition (Michael Rivero); (2) from the middle ground (Alan Hart); and (3) from committed Wikileak supporters (David Wilcock and me).
Today I’ll be training Sarah B. to assist me with the site. Sarah will be taking over the posting of channelled messages which should save me around two hours a day, which I can then devote to research. That means that I may not be posting very much today while Sarah learns the WordPress ropes.
The first article is by Michael Rivero who, for me, is a difficult character to fathom. While he is not a flaming neoconservative, he is a conservative. He has a pre-existing view of Israel which I don’t necessarily agree or disagree with but he does nonetheless remain within an anti-Zionist meme which serves as a cookie-cutter for his scholarship.
I prefer the views of people like, say, Paul Craig Roberts or Michel Chossudovsky who, while they have a point of view and oppose the immoral and illegal among the various acts which Israel does, such as Israel’s persecution of the Palestinians, are intellectually honest enough to see and address facts that don’t fit into their pre-existing perspective. Michael Rivero, in my opinion, while not dishonest like say Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh, is still very much intellectually captive to his meme.
Here is his article.
THE COMPLETE IDIOT’S GUIDE TO WIKILEAKS LATEST DOCUMENT DUMP
Wikileaks, following much media fanfare (reason for suspicion right there) has just released a huge number of documents supposedly leaked to WikiLeaks and no other websites’. The media is denouncing this as a threat to the United States while US politicians wring their hands and wonder when they will be free of the curse of the First Amendment and all that troublesome nonsense about Freedom of Speech. Many observers think this is a propaganda set up and that neither Julian Assange or WikiLaeks should be taken at face value. After all, Julian Assange keeps insisting there was no 9-11 conspiracy and the 9-11 truth movement a “distraction.” Apparently Julian Assange has patented conspiracy and nobody else may expose one except himself!
Of course, there is really not that much that is new in this latest dump. Like prior WikiLeaks dumps, most of it is old news mixed with some rather dubious claims. In his last such dump, Julian Assange included a claim that Osama bin Laden is still alive and controlling Al Qaeda. Of course, it is well documented outside the United States that Osama bin Laden has been dead for many years and that Al Qaeda itself is a fake front group created to hoax Americans into endless wars of conquest, much as the fictional Emmanuel Goldstein was used in George Orwell’s “1984.”
In yet another infamous propaganda attempt, WikiLeaks tried to claim that weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, justifying the invasion. No such weapons were ever found.
As for the present batch of documents, again it is a rehash of stories already known to the blog-o-sphere. Even those people who did not know US diplomats spy on their United Nations counterparts did not find it surprising or in any way a new idea.
So what is the real purpose of Assange’s little charade? Propaganda.
Propaganda is like rat poison. 95% of it is tasty, healthy food. But the purpose is to get you to swallow the poison. The same is true of the WikiLeaks document dump. The bait are all these old stories which we already knew about, used to convince us that the entire pile is “tasty, healthy food,” except that it isn’t. Buried in the pile of delicious, albeit past the expiration date morsels are the bits of poison which the US Government knows you will no longer accept at face value from the controlled media, but hope you will eat if handed to you by a con artist posing as hostile to the government.
So, given that 95% of the current WikiLeaks is really old news, as a public service I will point out the bits of poison that Julian hopes you will eat.
1. Iran is bad so you should all want to kill them.
2. Saudi Arabia is bad because they are funding Al Qaeda so you should all want to kill them.
3. North Korea is bad because they gave really long range missiles to Iran for Iran to put their nuclear warheads in, so you should all want to kill them.
4. China is messing with your computers, so you should all want to kill them.
That about sums it up. Oh yes, there is nothing negative about Israel in all these diplomatic messages, an impossibility given the lethal Israeli attack on the Aid Flotilla last May. That suggests who Assange really works for.
If WikiLeaks were really bad, why doesn’t DHS, which did not hesitate to takeover dozens of domains this last week for copyright infringement, not take over WikiLeaks domain for “National Security?” Clearly, the US Government wants you to read the “leaks!”
Next comes Alan Hart, who, while he questions Wikileaks and is a critic of Israel, is more balanced than Rivero and looks at exceptions to his viewpoint. He looks at what it is that leads people to suspect that Wikileaks is doing Israel’s work.
He cites Netanyahu saying that nothing Wikileaks has divulged has hurt Israel. I personally don’t see Netanyahu’s statement as indicating that Israel is pulling Wikileaks’ strings. If Israel were doing so, I wouldn’t expect Natanyahu to make the statement he did. It’s the statement of someone who sounds like he’s reactive to events – “Hey, we came off OK in this trove of documents.”
So Hart is more in the middle but still convinced that Wikileaks’ material has favored Israel.
IS WIKILEAKS BEING MANIPULATED BY AN INTELLIGENCE SERVICE?
By Alan Hart
The Wikileaks revelation that some Persian Gulf Arab leaders wanted (and still want?) America to attack Iran is confirmation of what some of us thought we knew – that Arab leaders are not merely impotent but as dangerously deluded as their Israeli counterparts.
Netanyahu was absolutely correct when he told a group of editors in Tel Aviv that “Israel has not been damaged at all by the Wikileaks publications.” A senior Israeli government official went further in his response to questions from AFP. He said: “We have come out looking good.” The leaked documents, he added, “confirm that the whole Middle East is terrified by the prospect of a nuclear IranŠ The Arab countries are pushing the United States towards military action more forcefully than Israel.”
Actually the assertion that “the whole Middle East is terrified by the prospect of a nuclear Iran” is nonsense. The Arab regimes which more or less do the bidding of America-and-Zionism are terrified, but the same cannot be said of many of their repressed subjects. As Noam Chomsky pointed out in a recent interview with Open Democracy’s Amy Goodman, a poll of Arab opinion indicates that 80% regard Israel as the major threat in the region.
Iran is seen as a threat by only 10%. The poll also indicated that 57% believe the region would be a more safe place if Iran had nuclear weapons. (As with Israel/Palestine, the regimes are effectively on one side – that of America-and-Israel, and the Arab masses are on the other side – that of the Palestinians).
The only good news confirmed by the latest Wiki leaked documents is that President Obama has so far resisted pressure from both Israel and the Arabs. (In fairness it should not be forgotten that President George “Dubya” Bush also said “No” to an attack on Iran when Vice President Cheney wanted him to authorize it).
There is no mystery about why any U.S. president who is not completely nuts will refuse to authorize an American attack on Iran (and do his best to stop Israel going it alone, no doubt with clearance through Saudi airspace). An American attack on Iran would have huge and possibly incalculable consequences for American interests. It would set in motion an escalating and possibly unending counter offensive including unbridled terrorism against American forces and facilities (civilian and business as well as military) around the world. And while that was happening, what is left of the global economy could be wrecked by sustained rises in the price of oil.
If those Arab leaders who pressed America to attack Iran discount the catastrophe scenario indicated above, they are very, very irresponsible. But there is more to their folly.
I don’t believe Iran’s ruling mullahs want nuclear weapons, but under pressure from the Revolutionary Guards (the real power in the country when push comes to shove?), they may have agreed in principle a while ago that Iran should have at least the possibility of developing a nuclear bomb for deterrence.
Prior to the publication of Wiki’s latest leaks, the question of how far and how fast Iran should go to have the possibility of developing a nuclear bomb was still the subject of debate in the leadership in all of its manifestations. It may be that Wiki’s revelations will play into the hands of those in Tehran who are insisting that Iran must have a nuclear bomb for deterrence.
While I was absorbing what the Wiki leaks confirmed about the attitudes of Arab leaders, I asked myself this question: What would I want if I was an Iranian, even one who hated the present regime?
I would want my government, whatever its composition, to crash ahead with developing a nuclear bomb for deterrence. I would tell myself that was the only way to keep Iran safe from Arab-backed Israeli threats. And when challenged in argument, I would say, “Do you think America and Britain would have invaded Iraq if Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons?”
My main point?
If Iran does become a nuclear-armed state, it will be because of Israeli threats and Arab leadership’s endorsement of them.
Now to a most controversial question, one at least as controversial as the various 9/11 conspiracy theories.
Is Wikileaks being manipulated by intelligence services – one or several?
There are a number of bloggers – some of them informed writers with credibility, some of them uninformed, anti-Semitic conspiracy theory nutters – who think the answer is “Yes”. More to the point is that no less a figure than Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter’s National Security Advisor, thinks the answer could be “Yes”. He said so in an interview with PBS’s Judy Woodruff and also in a subsequent BBC World Service (Radio) interview.
To Judy Woodruff he said:
“The real issue is, who is feeding Wikileaks? They’re getting a lot of information which seems trivial, inconsequential, but some of it seems surprisingly pointedŠ The very pointed references to Arab leaders could have as their objective undermining their political credibility at home, because this kind of public identification of their hostility towards Iran could actually play against them at homeŠIt’s a question of whether Wikileaks are being manipulated by interested parties that want to either complicate our relationship with other governments or want to undermine some governmentsŠ I have no doubt that Wikileaks is getting a lot of the stuff from sort of relatively unimportant sources, like the one that perhaps is identified on the air. But it may be getting stuff at the same time from interested intelligence parties who want to manipulate the process and achieve certain very specific objectives.”
Another way to look at the matter is to ask this question. If a visitor from Outer Space studied the first two days of Wikileak’s revelations, what preliminary conclusion would he (or she) come to?
I think it’s entirely possible that he (or she) would say: “The main message is clear. Iran is the biggest single threat to the peace of the region and the world and not only because the Israelis say so. Arab leaders agree with them. The secondary message is that apart from the Arab leaders who say they share Israel’s assessment, other Muslim leaders, those in Turkey and Pakistan especially, are not to be trusted.”
And here’s another question. Which party benefited most from the first two days of Wikileaks revelations? The obvious answer is the Zionist state of Israel.
I must also confess that I have a nagging worry (small but real) about the possibility that Julian Paul Assange, Wikileaks’ founder, has been compromised in some way and is open to manipulation. My concern on this account is the fact that he is a 9/11 conspiracy denier. He is firmly on the record as saying: “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.”
As I have said on public platforms in America and written in a number of articles for the worldwide web, I think there is irrefutable evidence that the Twin Towers were not brought down by the planes and their burning fuel.
My own conclusion at the present time is that I don’t have a conclusion; but I think the question of whether or not Wikileaks is being manipulated, and if so by whom, is worthy of deep and serious investigation.
Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East. His Latest book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, is a three-volume epic in its American edition. He blogs on http://www.alanhart.net and tweets on http://www.twitter.com/alanauthor.
In terms of Wikileaks’ supporters, Jean has posted an extract from David Wilcock’s October Surprise article and an extract from mine. I was disappointed that Jean left out the reasoning portion of my own article and only put in the point of view portion but then I was also surprised that he included it at all.
So our articles are representatiive of those from Wikileaks’ supporters.
First a note from Jean Hudon.
NOTE from Jean: Despite my initial misgivings about what looks to me like a sophisticated Psy-Op, several people nevertheless point out the fact that Wikileaks is providing an invaluable service through revealing the true face of our governments and I wish to reflect this viewpoint as well…
BUT BEFORE you get to review what I have from this other viewpoint, here is an excerpt from a LONG comment by David Wilcock – who believes this is part of a staged preparation to get full disclosure of ET presence and contacts underway (See WikiLeaks: new diplomatic cables contain UFO details, Julian Assange says):
CHINA’S OCTOBER SURPRISE III: THE FIGHT FOR DISCLOSURE
by David Wilcock (5 December 2010)
(…) My intuitive data has been very, very consistent in telling me the “negative elite” will not succeed. Any apparent victory they may expect to have is not part of the grander script this planet is being led through — by high-level angelic beings, for lack of a better term.During the last three years I have had at least 200 different dreams all saying the Old World Order will be defeated in a very obvious and dramatic fashion. These dreams continue right up to the present and have not changed — only gotten more intense.I have had many years of experience in how accurate this guidance can be, particularly when you get ‘clusters’ of data that all point in the same direction. The dreams have always said that Disclosure won’t happen until we see a clear and spectacular defeat of the Powers that Were on the world stage first. The two must work in conjunction.This is exactly what’s happening right now. Open your eyes and take a look at what you see.
IS WIKILEAKS NOTHING MORE THAN “CONTROLLED OPPOSITION?
“Some reliable insider sources, like TBRNews, were trying to say Wikileaks was all ‘controlled opposition’ — at least as of November 21st (emphasis added): http://tbrnews.org/wordpress/?p=237 Washington, D.C., November 21, 2010:
“Although it is not a matter of public knowledge, the facts surrounding the so-called ‘WikiLeaks’ are such that perhaps a little publicity would do no harm. This concept is a government disinformation site, designed to ‘leak’ information to the public that cannot be published in the mainline media. The ‘tens of thousands of vital messages’ dealing with Afghanistan have been tailor-made to give Obama the excuse to exit from Afghanistan.Unfortunately, the Republican gains in the House have made this policy null and void. The new Republicans do not want to stop war, they want even more — and so Obama’s plans to get out have been scrapped. The earlier WikiLeaks stories were all low-level, not important to U.S. national security and, aside from the Administration, of interest only to inane bloggers and their readers… The CIA loves to use people like Julian the Apostate because if they get caught, Langley always looks the other way and murmurs, ‘Julian who?’
WIKILEAKS IS THE BLOOD IN THE WATER
The problem with this argument is that if you start a war, you can end up getting shot. If you start a wildfire, your house could burn down. If this is ‘controlled opposition,’ then whoever started it has absolutely nothing to lose by potentially disemboweling the entire national security state. These were the Drudge headlines from Monday, November 29th… and they did not sound good for the Powers that Were. It’s a veritable orgy of ‘bad news’, as far as they are concerned — the “most embarrassing, damaging disclosure in decades”: Wikileaks is the blood in the water that turns ordinary people into hungry sharks when they’re already pissed off about the economy. Many disgruntled insiders now have a democratic, unregulated way to create more leaks — or make their own alternative wiki sites if they can’t get through to Assange.If someone at the top did officially sanction Wikileaks, it’s the political equivalent — at least for the Powers that Were — of playing a hot-potato game with nuclear fuel rods. The news system isn’t even designed to be able to handle this much information at once. It typically grabs two or three stories in politics, entertainment, sports, business, comedy, local, et cetera and that’s basically what you get. CLIP
DON’T ABANDON JULIAN ASSANGE NOW
by Steve Beckow (Dec 5, 2010)
The latest attack on Julian Assange has come from lightworker Jane Burgermeister. (1) Numerous attacks are coming from various quarters, many of them lightworkers.The current attack suggests that the Economist gave Assange an award in 2008 and the Economist is owned by the Rothschilds. It also suggests that Amnesty International gave Assange an award and AI is alleged to have a connection to the UN and IMF. (…)
The effect of Julian’s and Wikileaks’ disclosure is to make it more difficult for an illegal war to be waged in Afghanistan and Iraq. The effect of the lightworker suggestions that Julian is a tool of the cabal is to nullify the impact of that disclosure.You have to decide whether you’re going to abandon Julian now and watch the cabal survive the frontal assault that Julian’s efforts represent or take the risk of possibly making a bad decision but have the full impact of Wikileaks’ disclosure stand.Never mind the personalities involved. The Wikileaks disclosure is our best shot at tying the cabal in knots. Abandon Julian Assange now and we will lose that tool in our toolbox. (…)
Don’t let it play upon your desire to be honest and moral by feeding you information that makes it seem as if Julian is compromised – sex scandals, awards received, connections, whatever. Even if they are true, which I don’t think they are, the time to deal with that will be later. Now is the time to stand firm. CLIP