Saturday 11 December 2010


“Wikileaks is a big and dangerous US intelligence Con Job which will likely be used to police the Internet”….F. William Engdahl
“supporting WikiLeaks founder, Julius Assange and..calling for revolution due to government cover-ups are intended results of a counterintelligence reverse tactic”…Bob Levin, FBI whistleblower

By Gordon Duff
STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor
December 11, 2010

I can only say one word, flabbergasted. When I got the article by Larry Elder, a journalist who is known for finding the real story behind the story, I nearly dropped. The recent release of diplomatic cables, described by former National Security Advisor Zbiegnew Brzezinski as “seeded” with “pointed” facts to “favor an agenda” by an “intelligence agency” clearly restores long discredited George “W” Bush to a place of honor.

“Bush, hammered by the insidious “Bush Lied; People Died” mantra, endured one of the most vicious smears against any president in history. He is owed an apology.
When Hollywood makes ‘The Vindication of George W. Bush,’ maybe Sean Penn can play the lead.”

Bush, assaulted on all sides, his book tours besieged by protests, a president who left office with a country reeling in debt, losing two wars and now with his former vice president, Dick Cheney, indicted for bribery, is a hard sell as a hero.  Before this, Wikileaks championed the war on Iraq and its planned expansion into Iran, a continuing theme, as Brzezinski points out, always the “point” of Wikileaks, war on Iran.  Everything always goes there. 

“Hello, how’s your mom, wasn’t that an Iranian I saw sneaking into her garage…?”


Larry Elder isn’t lying.  Wikileaks is clearly trying, so very hard, to vindicate Bush and prove Saddam had a nuclear program, something proven dead wrong before 9/11, proven dead wrong in 2003 and in every other source on earth other than Wikileaks, long accepted as always “dead wrong.”  Isn’t the fact that the “sexed up” intel on WMD’s was long proven dead wrong the reason for the Chilcott Inquiry in Britain?  Hasn’t Tony Blair been assailed for years for having WMD (weapons of mass destruction) intelligence on Iraq “sexed up?”

Now that the death of Dr. David Kelly, the man who took Blair to task over this is now being looked at as a murder, one would think that trying to prove the utterly unproveable would be a hard sell.  Wikileaks doesn’t think so.  In fact, there is nothing Wikileaks doesn’t think it can’t do.

Elder scoured the Wikileaks “output” and makes a powerful case for the 2003 invasion.  From his article at

“The WikiLeaks de facto declassification of privileged material makes it case closed: Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction ~ and intended to restart his program once the heat was off.”

Elder then quotes Noah Schloctman, described as “a nonresident fellow at the liberal Brookings Institution” and editor of Wired Magazine.  Wired, of course, is owned by Advance Publications, you know, The New Yorker, Tatler, Brides Magazine and dozens of very conservative newspapers.  This is Noah Schloctman as quoted by Larry Elder as quoted by, oh, you get the picture.

“By late 2003, even the Bush White House’s staunchest defenders were starting to give up on the idea that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. But WikiLeaks’ newly-released Iraq war documents reveal that for years afterward, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction (emphasis added). … Chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam’s toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict ~ and may have brewed up their own deadly agents.”


These are the seven reports that Elder, and, by proxy, Schloctman, are referring to as taken from the Iraq War Logs;

1.      10th June 2006:  Al Qaida in Iraq insurgents plan to attack a forward operating base in Karmah with chemical weapons…The insurgents plan to deploy their chemical weapon using mortars as a delivery system. (Analyst Comments: In Iraq AQI has tried several times to employ chemical weapons against coalition forces).

2.      16th August 2008:  CBRN personnel have tested the rounds twice with M8 paper and J CAM. EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal), and chemical recon element assess that the chemical … tested positive for chemical agent. EOD reports 12 x full chemical rounds. 14 x damaged rounds are either leaking or empty. The cache consisted of 26 contaminated rounds and 14 empty 155mm rounds.

3.     13th October 2005: as of late September 2005, Al-Qa’ida in Iraq elements allegedly planned to attack Abu Ghurayb prison in early to mid-October using an unspecified number of mortars and car bombs…. AQIZ elements allegedly planned to use 20 “chemical munitions” brought from Syria.

4.      28th January 2006:  The ten are chemical weapons specialists and came to Iraq to support the chemical weapons operations of Hezbollah Islam I. (Field comment ~ The chemical operations of Hezbollah Islam I were previously reported as Al Qaida Iraq operations, the ten unidentified men are chemical weapons specialists from Syria)…The ten unidentified men were taken to Is’Hagey Iraq, where the unidentified chemicals weapons … are stored. The chemical weapons were brought from Syria to Iraq on 21 January 2006.

5.      29th December 2006:  As of 27 December 2006, three unidentified Bedouins who were alleged Iraq AQI Operatives planned to transport chemical munitions from Al Judayda, Saudi Arabia, to Nugra Al Salman District, a border area in Al Muthanna Province, Iraq …Subsequently, Iraq AQI operatives planned use the munitions to attack hospitals, outdoor markets, and US military forces in Al Basrah, Al Amarah and An Nasiriyah on or after 15 January 2007.

6.      5th March 2007:  AQI insurgency group is planning a rocket attack on several targets in the Baghdad International Zone and a US base in Al Rashdiyah by using Katusha rockets filled with unknown chemicals… these rockets were described as being three meters long and are modified in order to carry the extra weight. (Field Comment ~ the source was unable to provide the type of chemical and stated that these rockets probably originated from Iran).

7.      20th September 2007:  As of late September 2007, Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) militants in Mosul, Iraq were planning an imminent attack on Tall ‘Afar using rockets with Chlorine gas or another chemical compound … The rockets had a range of more than 20 Kilometers, and an impact radius of 50 to 100 square meters. (Comment: the Arabic word “Sarukh” was used to describe the rockets).


Let’s take a moment and examine these “Wikileak” reports that now are cited as vindicating President Bush, cited by many as reason for war on Iraq.  Is there anything in them that would, perhaps, make them less than credible and even “sexed up” like the documents the Chilcott Inquiry is looking into now?

Taken from the above reports, we find the following curious uses of “weasel words.”  June 10, 2006, we have “insurgents” but we know nothing but they are ‘planning” something they have “tried” but never done since, well, when did all this start?  1990?  30 years?

Then we are testing “rounds” we found on the ground somewhere.  We test them twice.  They are contaminated.  Surprise, surprise.  With areas of Iraq testing as having radiation levels 38 times higher than Hiroshima after a nuclear attack, it takes two tests to find “contamination. 

It gets even better, we move to January 28, 2006 and now manage to tie, not only Hezbollah and Iran but Syria as well, chemical weapons brought from Syria, to Iraq and stored but never used, never found.  This is the purest form of “sexed up” phony intelligence, totally imaginary, Bush era baloney resurrected by Julian Assange.  Nobody listened then but repackaged as a Wikileak, these hollow fabrications are now taken by some Journalists as “hard fact.”

On December 29, it gets better.  Our informants are three unidentified Bedouins who were “alleged.”  OK, we have to stop there, we have two weasel words in one sentence.  We have added another country to the Wikileaks “axis of evil,” Saudi Arabia.  The embarrassing disclosures of the recent Wiki-dump, not only discredit the Saudi’s, showing them as allies of Israel, but might they also discredit this “Wikileaked” report as well?

But they ARE allies of Israel!

March 5, more of the same.  I feel like I am with Napoleon, walking back from Moscow in the snow, barefoot and hungry.  This “Wikileak” tells us that rockets have “unknown chemicals,” weasel word number one and that they “probably” come from Iran.  DONG! The “two weasel words in one sentence” bell has run again.  My lunch contains unknown chemicals, “probably” from Iran.

Who wrote these reports?  None of the incidents warned of ever happened.  Some of the reports came from “private contractors” who were illegally tasked, according to the Department of Defense sources.  “Private contractors” means “rent-a-cops.”

“Go ask those three guys with the camel if they know of any rockets from Iran that are carrying chlorine gas made in Saudi Arabia.  While you are over there, get me some advice on my 401k, I am taking a beating in the bond market.”


US Army intelligence officers who authored some of the reports in Wikileaks reviewed their own work.  They indicated that reports were missing, incomplete, some with major changes and many significantly altered.

Wikileaks didn’t write the article vindicating Bush, it only supplied, as Zbigniew Brzezinski call it, “pointed leaks seeded by an intelligence agency to serve a private agenda.”  Our sources show those leaks, not only “seeded” but also falsified.  This is how the Wikileaks story finishes and finally proves that Bush was right all along, how Wikileaks smashes, once and for all, everyone opposing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that have killed untold numbers.  From Larry Elder and his “Wikileak” article;

“The Associated Press called yellowcake “the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment” and said that it “also can be enriched for use in reactors and, at higher levels, nuclear weapons using sophisticated equipment.”

DONG! We just hit the “weasel word” jackpot of all time.  Let’s count them:
1.   “seed material”  You could possibly, sort of, maybe, under some circumstances make something out of this that could hurt someone if enough of it fell on them.

2.   “higher grade”  Weapons use 95% enriched uranium.  Yellow cake is a form of processed ore.  You can buy “yellow cake” for under $10 a pound (market price).  By US Army standards for radiation hazards, “yellow cake” could be used as a food additive.

3.   “also can be”  Read “was not.”

4.   “at higher levels”  Read “were not”

5.   “using sophisticated equipment”  Read “that did not”…..exist.


Larry Elder found what he wanted in Wikileaks.  He wanted to save the tarnished reputation of George “W” Bush and Wikileaks was there.  When Benjamin Netanyahu is accused of being a “genocidal war monger,” Wikileaks is to his rescue too.  This is what Julian Assange had to say about Netanyahu as reported in the Israeli paper, Haaretz:

“Haaretz ~  WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on Wednesday defended his disclosure of classified U.S. documents by singling out Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as an example of a world leader who believes the publications will aid global diplomacy.

“We can see the Israeli Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu coming out with a very interesting statement that leaders should speak in public like they do in private whenever they can,” Assange told Time Magazine in an interview on Wednesday, days after his online whistleblower published thousands of secret diplomatic cables.

“He believes that the result of this publication, which makes the sentiments of many privately held beliefs public, are promising a pretty good [indecipherable] will lead to some kind of increase in the peace process in the Middle East and particularly in relation to Iran,” Assange said.

“I just noticed today Iran has agreed to nuclear talks. Maybe that’s coincidence or maybe it’s coming out of this process, but it’s certainly not being canceled by this process,” he added.”

References to WMD's at about 6:12

Many journalists have been unable to find this quote, particularly after stories tying Assange to meetings with Israeli officials in Geneva.  Many, ignoring the experts, ignoring hard evidence, keep hanging onto the Assange myth, looking for ways to serve a personal agenda or revealing dark truths about their own allegiances.   

The simple revelations in the Israeli press alone, should have been enough to warn the responsible members of the press they were being duped.  Haaretz, an Israeli paper, makes the accusations clear and shows how strongly were supported 8 days ago.


Haaretz also states:

“Also Wednesday, a senior Turkish official blamed Israel for the WikiLeaks release.  Addressing reporters, Huseyin Celik, deputy leader of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s AKP party, hinted that Israel engineered the leak of hundreds of thousands of United States diplomatic cables as a plot to pressure the Turkish government.

“One has to look at which countries are pleased with these,” Celik was quoted as saying. ‘Israel is very pleased. Israel has been making statements for days, even before the release of these documents.’ Documents were released and they immediately said, ‘Israel will not suffer from this.  ‘How did they know that?‘ Celik asked.”


This is directly from a December 2, 2010 article in Haaretz, one of Israel’s largest newspapers, yet journalists around the world, not just Larry Elder, are investigating these charges that come from, not only Turkey but top American officials like Brzezinski or investigative journalists like Wayne Madsen or military experts like Dr. Alan Sabrosky;

“The one striking exception in all of this global tour de farce is the Middle East. Certainly, even aside from Wikileaks founder Julian Assange’s fulsome praise of Binyamin Netanyahu, what is said and what is not, represent the message Israel and its partisans in the US Government (itself heavily Zionist and “Israel First” in orientation) want the world to hear, believe and accept. The message coming across in the US diplomatic cables could have been designed and drafted by Avigdor Lieberman, and who knows? It may have been…

The other part of the covert theme is the apparent absence of anything tough on Israel, which means that anything of the sort is Top Secret or better, was excised from the cables that were released, or simply doesn’t matter at all to anyone in or out of the Middle East. The Arab nations for many years have feared a real nuclear threat from Israel, not a fabricated threat by Iran, but nothing like that comes across, despite 60-plus years of hostility from most to Israel and its ambitions.

Far more significant to me is the utter lack to date of scathing commentaries on Israel and its policies, leadership and actions from SOMEWHERE in the world. Even if Arab leaders felt there was no point in doing so with the Americans, most others would not feel so constrained.

Something surely must have come to the attention of the US ambassadors to (e.g.) Turkey, South Africa, Brazil and Ireland, just to name a few of the many who have bitterly condemned Israel, and especially the disgusting duo of Netanyahu and Lieberman to say nothing of their predecessors, for what they have done to Palestine and the Lebanon; for Operation Cast Lead; for the settlements; for flagrant violations of UN Resolutions and the murder of UN officials; for Israel’s hostility to the Goldstone Report; for the blockade; for land expropriation; and for sheer thuggery and brutality.

But nothing like that is there, or at least has yet surfaced, which makes me increasingly inclined to see this as just another game of rhetorical smoke and mirrors, with a lot of real cables and real victims (like the poor US soldier who presumably gave Assange at least some of the cables), but with many or most of the Middle East cables “cooked” if not fabricated outright.

So these, at least, are probably the handiwork of Israeli~Americans or just Israelis putting their own spin on things, included in a mass of otherwise legitimate cables as camouflage and for validation. An Australian news website concluded that “[the] WikiLeaks cables [are] the 9/11 of world diplomacy.” Too, too true ~ same source, different vehicle and venue, all helping pave the road to yet another needless war in Israel’s service, this time against Iran. The gods weep ~ but not, presumably, Yahweh.”


Germany author and journalist F. William Engdahl sees the hand of the Mossad’s partner organization, the CIA in Wikileaks that and the very real threat against the internet, which Wikileaks, with its “ham handed” theatrics seems to be inadvertently supporting?  Or is it inadvertent?  Engdahl on Wikileaks:

“The story on the surface makes for a script for a new Oliver Stone Hollywood thriller. A 39-year old Australian hacker holds the President of the United States and his State Department hostage to a gigantic cyber “leak,” unless the President leaves Julian Assange and his Wikileaks free to release hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive US Government memos. A closer look at the details, so far carefully leaked by the most ultra-establishment of international media such as the New York Times, reveals a clear agenda. That agenda coincidentally serves to buttress the agenda of US geopolitics around the world from Iran to Russia to North Korea. 

“Wikileaks is a big and dangerous
US intelligence Con Job 
which will likely be used 
to police the Internet”….F. William Engdahl

But for anyone who has studied the craft of intelligence and of disinformation, a clear pattern emerges in the Wikileaks drama. The focus is put on select US geopolitical targets, appearing as Hillary Clinton put it ‘to justify US sanctions against Iran.’ They claim North Korea with China’s granting of free passage to Korean ships despite US State Department pleas, send dangerous missiles to Iran. Saudi Arabia’s ailing King Abdullah reportedly called Iran’s President a Hitler.”


Deborah Dupre in The Examiner, wrote on FBI whistleblower, Bob Levin’s impressions of Wikileaks;

“An FBI whistleblower has alerted that supporting WikiLeaks founder, Julius Assange and subsequently calling for revolution due to government cover-ups are intended results of a counterintelligence reverse tactic not in best interest of the public.

The recent operation on Somali and Nicaraguan youths that psychologically herded them into acts of terrorism need be a warning to Americans about PSYOPS master-minded so that innocent people are roped into actions against their best interest according to Levin.  “I’ve trained agents to do this against criminal targets, but as we know, these agencies have increasingly been politicized like the Gestapo,” he stated.

Bob Levin, FBI targeted whistle blower since 2000, knows sophisticated counterintelligence tactics designed to manipulate the unwitting.  Levin has lectured Special Agents in Training at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia. He has been requested to brief Counterterrorism Task force Agents relating to his skill sets and investigative techniques.  ‘My background was in codes and local, specialized state and federal law enforcement that ended in the FBI,’ Levin wrote to this writer in an email.

On December 8, Levin distributed an emailed alert using the following example posted by a WikiLeaks supporter:

‘People NEED to be supporting Julian Assange through this ridiculous time….Levin’s email warned about “FBI, CIA and NSA counterintelligence reverse tactics used to bait passionate persons into an actionable trap.’”

One can only praise Larry Elder.  Who could have discredited Wikileaks as thoroughly?  How many forgot the sins of earlier Wikileaks?  Dr. Sabrosky gets it right when he says that Wikileaks look like they “could have been designed and drafted by Avigdor Lieberman, and…may have been…”


Lila Rajiva on Wikileaks:
August 2, 2010: “Google Wikileaks and count the number of responses you get that you can fit into the right-left binary…… Am I mistaken? In those first 20 pages [of a Google search] I saw little or no substantial criticism of Wikileaks (anything beyond the left-right polarity I mentioned earlier).

Inflaming either of those poles could, I suspect, fuel the expansion of the war. I did see Chris Floyd’s piece way back, buried in the middle somewhere. I also saw a well-written Wired piece or two. Everywhere else, it was denunciations or defense from the mainstream media…. or uncritical acceptance from the alternative press. And I’m supposed to believe this huge buzz burying any kind of independent critical voice, largely emanating from the main outlets of financial aggrandizement and war-without-end…..or from foundation “activists”…… is, what, a victory for “the people”?”

June 27, 2010: “Assange objects to privacy. Wikileaks violates privacy. Kind of like Google, notice? Google thinks it’s heroic too and Google has its China-connection too.

Wikileaks makes anonymous sources, hacking, leaking, and ratting out your associates cool. It makes snitches heroes. Cui bono? Need I ask?

Corporate rivals, speculators and short-sellers, blackmailers, rival governments, spy agencies. Does that sound like the company the power-elites keep? So even if Wikileaks were not a disinformation agent, whose agenda would its work finally help?
A totalitarian outfit’s.

It certainly doesn’t help individualism. Ergo, whether Assange himself is a truth-teller, intel operative, visionary, grandstander, paranoid kook, hero, naif, villain, or anything else is beside the point. I can avoid wondering about his stuff with a clear conscience and can spend my energy putting posting material from the countless other reporters, bloggers, volunteers, activists, whistle-blowers and thinkers out there.

If he’s a decoy, I’ve saved myself a lot of trouble. And if he’s a hero, I would still have spent my time usefully. So no harm done. And ‘no harm done’ after all is the first thing we should care about even before we try to figure if blogging can do some good…”

No comments:

Post a Comment

If your comment is not posted, it was deemed offensive.