-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently I've had a few heated discussions regarding WikiLeaks with people who question the motives and consequences of leaked secret documents. Some believe a leak this massive is only possible if it is either a disinfo operation run by those seeking to further censorship the internet or in the best case scenario, it is being exploited to leak false or filtered documents that will push the globalists agenda. From what I gather, WikiLeaks sceptics think this way because, they say, WikiLeaks has had mass media attention. Because the content is slanted or unimportant. Because it promotes war with Iran and because it blames the US. Oh, and the fact that Assange hasn't caught up with the inconsistencies in the main stream story of what happened on 9/11. Some also claim a "fishy" gut feeling that something isn't right but they can't put the finger on it! Hmm...
Spinning the spin
Fair enough, Assange has discredited the 9/11 movement but I know plenty of intelligent people who still to this day don't dare looking at the evidence of what happened. Like Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore for example. Could this be a symptom of main stream indoctrination and arrogance of knowledge? Or is it
necessarily a conscious and deceitful action of a "disinfo agent"?
So the leaked documents marginalize the US and don't put Iran in a good light. They also reveal embarrassing facts about other countries like China, UK, France, Italy, Russia, Saudi Arabia and many more. Just because the main stream outlets focus on Iran and try to spin the information to fit their warmongering agendas, does it mean that the info itself is biased? Why would WikiLeaks bother releasing information that affects a huge amount of diplomats/spies all over the world across a broad range of countries? How else could they have shown neutrality? Also, why would a disinfo campaign disclose that US diplomats spied on UN leadership and were asked to collect passwords, credit card numbers and biometric data including fingerprints, iris scans and DNA?!!
It's true WikiLeaks has had the mass media attention but it would be hard to ignore a movement that has been causing an ever growing buzz on the internet over the past 4 years and that has had at least 3 major leaks just over the past year, the Iraq and Afghanistan war logs as well as the very graphic Collateral Murder video. The later shows a US Apache helicopter killing over a dozen of civilians indiscriminately. I'm still to see how this supports the disinfo operation theory.
It is also true that there are moves to further tightening the censorship of the internet. But is this a knee jerk reaction to turn an unpredicted crisis into a useful tool or is it all part of a carefully planned operation? Well, it may be either really. But if WikiLeaks is indeed part of a bigger plan to further erase human liberties, why did Amazon refuse to host the site? Why did Paypal suddenly realise that the WikiLeaks donations account was not in accord with their terms and conditions? Why are there politicians calling for the website to be taken offline or even Assange's assassination?! Why was the website's DNS routing service dropped? Why did MasterCard make it impossible for people to donate? Why was the Swiss bank account frozen? Why the smear campaign of Assange and now his arrest? Why confirming the corruption up high that most already suspected and spreading further distrust of the political system?
I have to say, if WikiLeaks is indeed a disinfo operation, they sure are putting up a heck of a show! But what do I know?
The victory of cynicism
Assange has a whole team of committed volunteers behind him but the media focus is mainly on the man. He's the "lightening rod" of WikiLeaks as he puts it. Now, if there's something that those at the top want more than anything, is to program in the masses the deeply cynical belief that an individual cannot ever possibly make a difference. That individual effort will always be in vain. That any apparent positive change always has a negative agenda behind. So that when someone really does stand out and really does rock the boat people will see it as another covert operation. This is one of the ways how the small elite keeps the power from the huge majority. By making you believe that you are insignificant that you have no power.
Beyond content
But this isn't the full story. Of course Assange and WikiLeaks have an agenda. Even if they're trying to achieve transparency it is still an agenda. But how they plan to achieve this is not through the leaking of crucial, incriminating juicy content itself as the disappointed public expects. Apparently, which information is leaked is unimportant. Yes, you read it right, the information is secondary.
In an essay written by Assange in 2006, entitled "State and Terrorist Conspiracies", the hacker equates a secret cabal to a computer network and explains how it cannot survive in an environment where secrets can be leaked. He argues that not only will the network have to adjust to the constant whistle-blowing, therefore distracting it from its main agenda, but will also become highly paranoid and therefore ineffective. And so far that is precisely what we're seeing as those affected by the leaks run around like headless chickens desperately trying to shut down, to censor and to stop that which is unstoppable. It is the perfect check mate.
Spinning the spin
Fair enough, Assange has discredited the 9/11 movement but I know plenty of intelligent people who still to this day don't dare looking at the evidence of what happened. Like Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore for example. Could this be a symptom of main stream indoctrination and arrogance of knowledge? Or is it
necessarily a conscious and deceitful action of a "disinfo agent"?
So the leaked documents marginalize the US and don't put Iran in a good light. They also reveal embarrassing facts about other countries like China, UK, France, Italy, Russia, Saudi Arabia and many more. Just because the main stream outlets focus on Iran and try to spin the information to fit their warmongering agendas, does it mean that the info itself is biased? Why would WikiLeaks bother releasing information that affects a huge amount of diplomats/spies all over the world across a broad range of countries? How else could they have shown neutrality? Also, why would a disinfo campaign disclose that US diplomats spied on UN leadership and were asked to collect passwords, credit card numbers and biometric data including fingerprints, iris scans and DNA?!!It's true WikiLeaks has had the mass media attention but it would be hard to ignore a movement that has been causing an ever growing buzz on the internet over the past 4 years and that has had at least 3 major leaks just over the past year, the Iraq and Afghanistan war logs as well as the very graphic Collateral Murder video. The later shows a US Apache helicopter killing over a dozen of civilians indiscriminately. I'm still to see how this supports the disinfo operation theory.
It is also true that there are moves to further tightening the censorship of the internet. But is this a knee jerk reaction to turn an unpredicted crisis into a useful tool or is it all part of a carefully planned operation? Well, it may be either really. But if WikiLeaks is indeed part of a bigger plan to further erase human liberties, why did Amazon refuse to host the site? Why did Paypal suddenly realise that the WikiLeaks donations account was not in accord with their terms and conditions? Why are there politicians calling for the website to be taken offline or even Assange's assassination?! Why was the website's DNS routing service dropped? Why did MasterCard make it impossible for people to donate? Why was the Swiss bank account frozen? Why the smear campaign of Assange and now his arrest? Why confirming the corruption up high that most already suspected and spreading further distrust of the political system?
I have to say, if WikiLeaks is indeed a disinfo operation, they sure are putting up a heck of a show! But what do I know?
The victory of cynicism
Assange has a whole team of committed volunteers behind him but the media focus is mainly on the man. He's the "lightening rod" of WikiLeaks as he puts it. Now, if there's something that those at the top want more than anything, is to program in the masses the deeply cynical belief that an individual cannot ever possibly make a difference. That individual effort will always be in vain. That any apparent positive change always has a negative agenda behind. So that when someone really does stand out and really does rock the boat people will see it as another covert operation. This is one of the ways how the small elite keeps the power from the huge majority. By making you believe that you are insignificant that you have no power.
Beyond content
But this isn't the full story. Of course Assange and WikiLeaks have an agenda. Even if they're trying to achieve transparency it is still an agenda. But how they plan to achieve this is not through the leaking of crucial, incriminating juicy content itself as the disappointed public expects. Apparently, which information is leaked is unimportant. Yes, you read it right, the information is secondary.In an essay written by Assange in 2006, entitled "State and Terrorist Conspiracies", the hacker equates a secret cabal to a computer network and explains how it cannot survive in an environment where secrets can be leaked. He argues that not only will the network have to adjust to the constant whistle-blowing, therefore distracting it from its main agenda, but will also become highly paranoid and therefore ineffective. And so far that is precisely what we're seeing as those affected by the leaks run around like headless chickens desperately trying to shut down, to censor and to stop that which is unstoppable. It is the perfect check mate.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment