by SCOTT CREIGHTON
Part 1: The Genesis of the Whistleblower Honeypot, Wikileaks
Part 2: The Verdict is in (or “The Spy Who Shagged Us”)
Attention future whistleblowers: Contrary to “popular opinion” (conveniently being forged by the complicit MSM on both the contrived ”left” and the complicit ”right”) there is ample reason to be extremely cautious about using Wikileaks as the publishing venue for information you wish to make public.
While the evidence mounts that seems to lead one to the conclusion that Wikileaks is indeed a State Department/CIA ”Honeypot” type operation, there are many other options for disseminating the important information you may be in possession of (such as Project Censored, The Center for Research on Globalization (available in 7 languages as well as English),Press TV, RT, and many, many others). At least, that is true just as long as the internet remains open and free of unwarranted government control.
To be clear, I am not saying that the State Department merely provided pre-screened and hand-selected materials to be fed to a dupe or an agent then “leaked” to Wikileaks as some others have suggested.
I am stating unequivocally that Wikileaks itself is a construct of the State Department and the CIA, from the beginning, for the sole purpose of luring potential whistle blowers into exposing themselves and their material prior to releasing such information and harming the Global Free Market Wars agenda.
Whistleblowers: prior to contacting Wikileaks, you owe it to yourself and to the people who need to see the material you are in possession of (us), to consider what I have compiled here today. And you should consider it very, very carefully. Remember Wikileaks is not the only option, there are other, more credible options (some of which will be detailed at the end of this article)
(The following is my estimation of the kind of ‘action item report’ generated in either a globalist think tank or a Psyops/PR contractor’s brainstorming session addressing the growing concern of whistleblowers and how best to deal with them. This is how and why I believe Wikileaks started. It is only an estimation.)
Problem: Until a reasonable justification can be orchestrated to explain the need to shut down “parts” of the internet to the general population of the United States and other contributing nations (such as the outbreak of a new large-scale war or another “Pearl Harbor type event” or the complete breakdown of the nation’s economy via hyperinflation …ect.) which will ultimately provide us the greatest measure of control and therefore the greatest internal and external flexibility in our actions, the potential threat posed by whistleblowers (which have already proven to be extremely costly to our overall global agenda to the point of near catastrophic results) remains as the most unforeseeable, unpredictable, and incalculable risk facing our collective efforts today.
Solution: Ideally, any solution will involve augmenting our current corrective measures, ie. to quickly generate narrative controlling “reactions” to any given development via our control of the main stream media outlets as well as through opinion manipulation contractors and their social media searching/steering software tools. The inherent weakness of these current measures is that they are reactionary in nature and the potentially damaging information is already being freely disseminated by time they begin to take action. What is needed is a more pro-active solution; one that allows our damage control to begin BEFORE the information is set free upon the public.
Therefore the ideal solution would involve the creation of the illusion of a world-wide respectable and recognizable publishing house “brand” specializing in the dissemination of “perceived” high value whistleblower material. This site, this “whistleblower brand-name”, must remain highly respectable within the ever-growing dissident communities so that potential whistleblowers will contact us and offer not only their information but also their identities as well, feeling completely safe and secure due to “word of mouth” advertising coming from the rest of the communities themselves.
Once contact is made and the actors have submitted their potentially damaging material and their identities to the publishing house, naturally they will be told there is a period of time required to verify the information. During that time, while the whistleblower expects nothing, decisions can be made as to the best course of action to be taken to either disarm the scope of the threat of the information (by various means of undermining the source or discrediting the information itself prior to release) or, in the more extreme cases, to terminate the threat altogether by the deployment of “other assets”
Summary: Let’s quit playing “catch-up” and “spin control” with potentially disastrous and game-changing information leaks; it’s a losers game of Russian Roulette with only one outcome that is absolutely certain. Instead, let’s use all available resources immediately to manufacture another dissident honeypot which will, if ideally created and received, hand over potentially damaging information and informants to us BEFORE they ever see the light of day or feel the heat of the international press’ spotlight.
In short, rather than playing “whack a mole”, we will hang out our shingle and let the rats come to us, thus dramatically reducing the threat of catastrophic political, financial, and ideological restructuring at this critical juncture of our overall agenda.
Yes, this is only an estimate of what may have been the kind of thinking that created a honeypot like Wikileaks. But you can see how painfully obvious the need for something like this must have been to people who were in the business of lying to the American and the British people on a daily basis. Lies that could easily cost Prime Ministers their jobs or presidents their freedom. My estimated “action item memo” doesn’t even address the cost/benefit analysis of setting up an operation like this.
Yes, this is only an estimate. But when put in simple terminology like this, one has to wonder if it is at all possible that a memo nearly exactly like this one doesn’t in fact already exist. How could they not have come to these conclusions given the magnitude of their agenda and the frequency of their lies and criminal behavior?
So now, let’s look at the hard evidence surrounding Wikileaks and see if we are on the right track.
In Part 1 of this essay, “The Genesis of the Whistleblower Honeypot, Wikileaks“, we explored one possible motivation behind the CIA and the State Department setting up an international fake whistleblower site like Wikileaks; damage control. Since most dissidents understand the MSM and corporate news print media is controlled and therefore untrustworthy these days (and have been for decades), potential whistleblowers would look for an alternative outlet to publish material that would be potentially damaging to the administration’s globalist agenda. So why not create one, hype it with carefully staged “leaked” material, and then let the “rats” come to them.
One would be almost disappointed if they hadn’t come up with an idea like this.
But having an idea that Wikileaks was constructed as a psyops honeypot is one thing, proving it is another. Anything short of a confession from Jullian Assange or his latest IRS tax return prominently featuring paychecks from the Central Intelligence Agency is probably going to simply land me in the “conspiracy theorist of the conspiracy theorists” category.
But I have been there before (over and over and over and over again) so let’s have at it and see what we come up with.
exhibit ”A”: John Young, former advisory board member of Wikileaks
“… a member of the Wikileaks advisory board and the founder of cryptome.org, an online depot for leaked documents, corporate rumours and government conspiracies, left Wikileaks, accusing the group of being a CIA conduit.” Wired 2009
I am certainly not the first person to conclude that Wikileaks is nothing more than a CIA operation. John Young came to this conclusion years ago. Young was brought in as Wikileaks was created in order to give them some instant credibility; Young already ran a site called Cryptome which published material the globalists generally didn’t want people to read.
According to the Wired article, Young has since “changed his mind” about Wikipedia, but I don’t really see it that way. In a recent interview on Democracy NOW!, John Young drew Amy Goodman’s attention to the fundraising that Assange is currently running in an effort to build up a “legal defense fund”, some 2 million dollars worth and he doesn’t even face charges as of yet.
Wayne Madson of the Wayne Madson Report and various Chinese dissidents came to the conclusion that Wikileaks and Assange were CIA plants years ago.
There are strong suspicions that Wikileaks is yet another Soros-funded ”false flag” operation on the left side of the political spectrum. WMR has learned that after former Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN) decided to oppose Soros’s choice of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan’s deputy Mark Malloch Brown as President of the World Bank, succedding the disgraced Paul Wolfowitz, Soros put the Wikileaks operation into high gear. “Daniel Schmitt” hacked into Coleman’s supporters list, stealing credit card info, addresses, and publishing the “take” on Wikileaks. Democrat Al Franken, who was strongly backed by Soros, defeated Coleman in a legally-contested and very close election. Real Democracy Now
The following is an excerpt taken from a 2007 email sent from Wikileaks to John Young describing their intimate connections with globalist institutions including the CIA, World Bank, and the Council on Foreign Relations…
If fleecing the CIA will assist us, then fleece we will. We have pullbacks from NED, CFR, Freedomhouse and other CIA teats. We have all of pre 2005 afghanistan. Almost all of india fed. Half a dozen foreign ministries. Dozens of political parties and consulates, worldbank, apec, UN sections, trade groups, tibet and fulan dafa associations and… russian phishing mafia who pull data everywhere. Real Democracy Now
It’s not clear if each and every member inside Wikileaks would be in on the fraud. Some may actually think that receiving intel from sources like these would be a constructive thing. Hard to say how naive some people are who think they are on the cutting edge of revolution. Then again, it could simply mean that they are clearly lying even amongst themselves. Either way, all of these seemingly impossible connections for an underground leak publishing house that had just started up seemed a bit odd to Mr. Young, who eventually combined this info with the fact that Wikileaks was mired in abject secrecy, and he came to the only conclusion that would make sense to any rational thinking person; Wikileaks was a Cia/State Department project.
As reported by Jack Blood, Wikileaks are partners with the Open Society Institute, a George Soros funded operation!
People such as Wayne Madsen and John Young have already attempted to expose Wikileaks as a front organization. When contacted for this article, John Young, the founder of Cryptome, had this to say:
“The principal deficiency of Wikileaks is its lack of transparency about its operators and funds, characteristics of spies and secret societies up to no good and whose main purpose is to hide from public accountability and conceal corruption and criminality.
Source, Alex Thomas, the Intel Hub
exhibit “B”: Subject Matter
Several other reputable researchers have already written extensively about the particulars of the subject matter of the recent Wikileaks “bombshells” and so I won’t go too deeply into this matter but rather let them make the case for me…
“Is there anything in these breathless new recitations that we did not already know? For example, the NYT offers a few short vignettes from the leaked documents concerning botched raids and errant missiles that slaughter civilians. But in almost every case, these have already been extensively reported — in the Times itself and other mainstream venues — in much greater detail, with quotes and evidence from the victims and local eyewitnesses, and not just the self-interested, ass-covering perspective of official occupation reports. And the “revelation” that occupation forces are killing “an amazing number of people” who have “never proven to be a threat” at checkpoints was confirmed months ago by no less than Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the erstwhile commander of the whole shebang.
Likewise, the entanglement between Pakistani intelligence services and some elements of violent resistance in Afghanistan has been a constant theme of mainstream reportage on the Afghan War since the very beginning — not to mention a relentless drumbeat of official “concern” in Washington. It is a rare week indeed when some Washington bigwig is not hinting darkly – or declaring outright — that Pakistan needs to “get with the program” in one way or another.
… Where then are the “revelations”? Anyone who has regularly read, well, the New York Times, the Guardian and Der Spiegel could not remotely be surprised by any of the facts (as opposed to the oceans of spin and supposition) buried in this mountain of leakage. These are not the Pentagon Papers or the Downing Street Memos; they do almost nothing to alter the public image of the war, and tell almost nothing that we don’t already know.
In fact, the overall effect of the multi-part coverage of the documents is to paint a portrait of plucky, put-upon Americans trying their darnedest to get the job done despite the dastardly dealings and gooberish bumblings of the ungrateful little brown wretches we are trying to save from themselves.
… So you see, if our noble enterprise is failing, it’s because the Afghans are idiots, the Pakistanis are backstabbers … and the Iranians are behind it all, training Taliban fighters, making their bombs and bankrolling the political opposition to America’s appointed satrap, Hamid Karzai.“ Empire Burlesque, Chris Floyd
This is a critical aspect of these “leaks” that Floyd has touched upon. If you step back for a second, you can see the ham-handed brush strokes of a mediocre PR agent all over them. A propaganda campaign would want the “leaks” to appear to be earth-shattering revelations, but at the same time, they don’t want to throw the baby out with the bath water nor do they want to miss the opportunity to help support the “official narrative” of the Global Free Market Wars. It’s a fine line to tread which they didn’t do very well.
Daniel Ellsberg was asked to comment on the comparisons being made between the Manning Wikilleaks and his own Pentagon Papers. His responce is quite telling…
The Pentagon Papers were high-level, top-secret documents on internal estimates, alternatives being debated, presidential directives, and so forth. The Afghanistan documents are lower-level field reports, of the kind that I was reading and writing when I was a foreign-service officer in Vietnam. In fact, I could’ve written a number of them—they were very like the ones I wrote, with the place names changed. Which confirms what I’ve been saying for some years: that I see this war as Vietnamistan. It’s really in many respects a replay of the stalemate we were in 40 years ago. D. Ellsberg
These documents were not high-level secured top-secret documents in fact they were nothing of the sort. They almost read AS IF they were intended to be leaked in the first place. Instead this seems like a cheap PR campaign parody of the Pentagon Papers written by people who THINK they are smarter than everyone else.
The leaked documents also claim that Osama bin Laden, who was reported dead three years ago by the late Pakistan candidate Benazir Bhutto on BBC, was still alive, conveniently keeping the myth alove for the Obama Administration War on Terror at a point when most US Americans had forgotten the original reason the Bush Administration allegedly invaded Afghanistan to pursue the Saudi Bin Laden for the 9/11 attacks.
… The London Financial Times says Gul’s name appears in about 10 of roughly 180 classified US files that allege Pakistan’s intelligence service supported Afghan militants fighting Nato forces. Gul told the newspaper the US has lost the war in Afghanistan, and that the leak of the documents would help the Obama administration deflect blame by suggesting that Pakistan was responsible. Gul told the paper, “I am a very favourite whipping boy of America. They can’t imagine the Afghans can win wars on their own. It would be an abiding shame that a 74-year-old general living a retired life manipulating the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan results in the defeat of America.”
… As well, in a UPI interview on September 26, 2001, two weeks after the 9/11 attacks, Gul stated, in reply to the question who did Black September 11?, “Mossad and its accomplices. The US spends $40 billion a year on its 11 intelligence agencies. That’s $400 billion in 10 years. Yet the Bush Administration says it was taken by surprise. I don’t believe it. Within 10 minutes of the second twin tower being hit in the World Trade Center CNN said Osama bin Laden had done it. That was a planned piece of disinformation by the real perpetrators…”
Gul is clearly not well liked in Washington. He claims his request for travel visas to the UK and to the USA have repeatedly been denied. Making Gul into the arch enemy would suit some in Washington nicely. F. William Engdahl
So let’s see how this all stacks up…
1. Civilians are killed in Afghanistan (knew that)
2. Drones are killing civilians (knew that)
3. There are U.S. black ops assassination squads killing people (knew that)
4. We are funding both sides of the war (knew that)
5. Pakistan is losing control and might need to be “regime changed” (propaganda)
6. Bin Laden is alive and well in Pakistan (propaganda)
7. Iran is helping the insurgency (propaganda)
8. Afghanistan is fucked because of the cowardly and corrupt Afghanis (propaganda)
9. The State Department has only the best intentions in mind (clearly propaganda)
10. All of this mess was from before the Anointed One’s “Surge” in Afghanistan
So as you can see, the subject matter of the glorified Wikileaks material is a bit PG-13 if you ask me and it certainly seems like it has an after-taste of the Global Free Market War’s corporate sponsors as well.
exhibit ”C”: Slim Shady and the Snitch Cover
In order for the leaker honeypot trick to work, you must have a couple of things. The first thing is a “proven” track record of leaking sensitive material that gets a lot of attention and thus far, the typical MSM outlets have played along nicely in the fabrication of that illusion so far. Hell, they even got 3 complicit media organizations to play along right off the bat: the New York Times, the Guardian, and Der Spiegel.
The next thing you need to do is to fabricate a “plausible” narrative explaining how the whistleblower got caught WITHOUT being sold out by the honeypot: ie… SNITCH COVER. This is important because without it, no one would trust the honeypot and all the previous efforts are for naught.
Enter “Slim Shady”.
The Adrian Lamo aspect of this story is possibly the weakest part of the entire thing so much so it’s almost as if they threw it together at the last-minute. Glenn Greenwald has done a remarkable job piecing all of this information together and trying to come up with a coherent understanding of what the “official Manning/Lamo” connection really is. It’s so convoluted, I won’t bother translating Greenwald’s work for you, instead you can read it yourself…
From the start, this whole story was quite strange for numerous reasons…
A definitive understanding of what really happened is virtually impossible to acquire, largely because almost everything that is known comes from a single, extremely untrustworthy source: Lamo himself. Greenwald
Greenwald goes on to explain that at the source of this whole story about Manning, Wikileaks, and Lamo is a guy called Kevin Poulsen with WIRED Magazine. Poulsen, like Lamo, is a convicted hacker caught by the powers that be then released FOR SOME REASON to work as some kind of “journalist” in the hacking community. This is typical CIA trademark SOP; catch a guy then “turn” them for use as an asset or a snitch. It’s also important to remember that Wikileaks has its roots from the “hacking” community.
As the story grinds on, apparently on May 20th Poulsen ran some ridiculous story, out of the blue, about Lamo getting his bag full of drugs stolen. All of a sudden, the guy has ” Asperger’s Syndrome, a somewhat fashionable autism diagnosis which many stars in the computer world have also claimed” and it’s this story that supposedly Bradley Manning picks up on and therefore decides to confess everything to Adrian Lamo, on an IM chat log, for no real reason what-so-ever.
It was just over two weeks after writing about Lamo’s Asperger’s, depression and hacking history that Poulsen, along with Kim Zetter, reported that PFC Manning had been detained, after, they said, he had “contacted former hacker Adrian Lamo late last month over instant messenger and e-mail.” Lamo told me that Manning first emailed him on May 20 and, according to highly edited chat logs released by Wired, had his first online chat with Manning on May 21; in other words, Manning first contacted Lamo the very day that Poulsen’s Wired article on Lamo’s involuntary commitment appeared (the Wired article is time-stamped 5:46 p.m. on May 20).
Lamo, however, told me that Manning found him not from the Wired article — which Manning never mentioned reading — but from searching the word “WikiLeaks” on Twitter, which led him to a tweet Lamo had written that included the word “WikiLeaks.” Even if Manning had really found Lamo through a Twitter search for “WikiLeaks,” Lamo could not explain why Manning focused on him, rather than the thousands of other people who have also mentioned the word “WikiLeaks” on Twitter, including countless people who have done so by expressing support for WikiLeaks. Greenwald
Now does anyone here really believe that a guy who just dumped tons of secured State Department communications on Wikileaks is going to confess everything on a non-secured IM chat and emails? Especially when the Dragon Lady is running the State Department and the guy doing the “confessing” is smart enough to know the NSA is sweeping the intertubes just looking for whistleblowers? I don’t think so.
Many of the bizarre aspects of this case, at least as conveyed by Lamo and Wired, are self-evident. Why would a 22-year-old Private in Iraq have unfettered access to 250,000 pages of diplomatic cables so sensitive that they “could do serious damage to national security?” Why would he contact a total stranger, whom he randomly found from a Twitter search, in order to “quickly” confess to acts that he knew could send him to prison for a very long time, perhaps his whole life? And why would he choose to confess over the Internet, in an unsecured, international AOL IM chat, given the obvious ease with which that could be preserved, intercepted or otherwise surveilled? These are the actions of someone either unbelievably reckless or actually eager to be caught. Greenwald
Or these are the actions of a character in a narrative created by rather dull-witted propagandists to explain how Bradley Manning got caught outside from him being either a fabricated story altogether or snitched out by Wikileaks themselves.
Now, as ridiculous as that stupid story got, it began to get even dumber. Apparently Lamo didn’t like being called a “snitch” by the hacker community and therefore losing all his hard-fought ”street cred” and so it seems he got his friends over at WIRED to come up with a different twist to the story, this time painting Lamo as nothing more than a patriotic victim of his circumstances… and introducing the character of Chet Uber and his dreaded “Project Vigilant“.
… that it was Uber who directed Lamo to federal authorities to inform on Manning by using his contacts to put Lamo in touch with the “highest level people in the government” at “three letter agencies”; and, according to a Wired report this morning, it was Uber who strongly pressured Lamo to inform by telling him (falsely) that he’d likely be arrested if he failed to turn over to federal agents everything he received from Manning.
So, while Lamo has repeatedly denied (including in his interview with me) that he ever worked with federal authorities, it turns out that he was a “volunteer analyst” for an entity which collects private Internet data in order to process it and turn it over to the Federal Government. That makes the whole Manning case all the more strange: Manning not only abruptly contacted a disreputable hacker out of the blue and confessed to major crimes over the Interent, but the hacker he arbitrarily chose just happened to be an “analyst” for a group that monitors on a massive scale the private Internet activities of American citizens in order to inform on them to U.S. law enforcement agencies. Greenwald
Now Glenn Greenwald and John Young of Cryptome.com have come to the conclusion that there is something very strange about Project Vigilant; it may just be a flimsy front group operation or just a ragged collection of die-hard neoliberalist fascism fans determined to squeal on anyone and everyone who mentions Che Guevara in public. Who knows. Here is the Cryptome log on Project Vigilant, you figure it out. It doesn’t matter from my perspective; it’s still a bullshit story tacked onto another bullshit story about how Bradley Manning was snitched out by Adrian Lamo.
And mom always told me, “two wrongs don’t make a right”.
exhibit ”D”: Wikileaks Not Protected by Swedish Law
In Sweden there is a law, a constitutional amendment no less, that says sources are protected by law and revealing those sources is a punishable offense.
Now Wikileaks isn’t actually located in Sweden or at least, we don’t know if it is. In fact, no one knows where it is. There supposedly are no offices, no files, no desks and chairs of any kind. It could be nowhere or it could be everywhere… it could even be housed in the basement offices at the National Security Agency for all we know.
But their servers are housed in Sweden which means they could easily be shielded under that country’s protections… but guess what? They aren’t. No one at Wikileaks has bothered to fill out the paperwork that would protect them and more importantly… their sources.
Bet ya didn’t know that, did ya?
Rules on source protection are written into the Swedish constitution and effectively block individuals and government agencies from attempting to uncover journalists’ sources. Revealing the identity if sources who wish to remain anonymous is a punishable offence.
But the law only apply to websites or publications that possess a special publishing licence (utgivningsbevis) granting them constitutional protection, and WikiLeaks has not acquired the requisite paperwork, local newspaper Sydsvenskan reports [article in English].
“To my mind, it is too simple to claim that all Wikileaks sources are totally protected in Sweden,” deputy Chancellor of Justice Håkan Rustand told the newspaper.
Author and journalist, Anders R Olsson, who specializes in Swedish freedom of expression issues, said he found it strange that WikiLeaks did not appear fully aware of the legal situation. The Local
What happens here is quite interesting actually. Wikileaks has been hosted out of Sweden for 4 years now and they have yet to file this paperwork that would guarantee the protection of their whistleblowers? Does that seem right to you?
It make sense only if you consider that Wikileaks, since they aren’t actually in Sweden, is only responsible themselves IF they were to file this paperwork… meaning that if they were to file it and suddenly someone were to come out and show that Wikileaks actually has been selling out their sources all along, then they (Wikileaks, Assange, ect.) can be prosecuted under Swedish law.
So in this case, as it stands at the moment, Wikileaks’ sources are wide open for disclosure and Wikileaks themselves are completely without legal consequence.
Is it any wonder that the hosting company that puts up Wikileaks for all the world to see has YET to even be contacted by the U.S. authorities about all these “leaks”? Odd that the State Department hasn’t gone after the host site to stop these “leaks” but Assange himself admits he “vetted” the information with the White House prior to putting it up. Deduce from that what you will…
Viborg, who has a Swedish law degree and has served as a legal advisor to popular filesharing website The Pirate Bay, said PRQ had yet to be contacted by Swedish or US authorities about WikiLeaks’ activities. The Local
The evidence goes on and on an on at least in as much as it presents even more reasons to be leery of this remarkably stupid story. Manning himself is a bit of an odd twist; an out of the closet homosexual who just happened to want to grow up and be a spy who somehow found himself in possession of hundreds of thousands of State Department secret memos then was able to crack U.S. security encryption, download them on “Lady Gaga” (nice contemporary touch from the all to hip psyops department), ship them off somehow to Wikileaks without being detected, and then confess like a simpering schoolgirl to a guy he never met via an IM chat log.
Bradley Manning’s mother is shielded from both the press and the FBI investigations because she is “disabled” in some manner. Ever heard of the feds or the press giving a crap about that when it comes to national security? Me neither.
Manning has been whisked off, never interviewed by anyone really, and only charged with relatively minor offensives at this point. In fact, Bradley Manning hasn’t been charged with giving 260,000 State Department memos to Wikileaks… only 50..
EMMANUEL GOLDSTEIN: Keep in mind, we don’t even know if Bradley Manning ever gave 260,000 documents to WikiLeaks. We don’t know that.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, he wasn’t charged with that. He’s charged with fifty cables.
EMMANUEL GOLDSTEIN: Right, which is a big difference. And fifty cables could be completely innocuous. There could be no information of any worth in there whatsoever. But by saying 260,000, we think that it’s an attack on the country, our defense is in shambles because of this. And that’s not the case at all. Democracy NOW!
All while the left and right media and politicos go back and forth between praising Bradley Manning and Assange as the “heroes” of the century or ranting about how they should be waterboarded till they piss themselves… all of course depending on how your voting block base sees the world in general.
All so convenient, all so patently sanitized, and all so obviously contrived from the very beginning.
AMY GOODMAN: We only have fifteen seconds, but why did you adopt the nom de plume or nom de guerre, however you want to put it, Emmanuel Goldstein?
EMMANUEL GOLDSTIEN: Well, it’s interesting. Emmanuel Goldstein in George Orwell’s 1984 is seen as the enemy of the people, but I should point out that in the end of the book—I don’t want to spoil it for anybody—he is actually a fictitious creation of the government. Democracy NOW!
The evidence shows that from the very beginning Wikileaks is and has been a manifestation of the State Department and the CIA. It’s a honeypot designed to sucker potential whistleblowers in, take their info, and then dispose of them or the story in whatever manner they so chose. Though the jury may still be out on Manning himself, if he was part of this or just set up, but as far as Wikileaks and Jullian Assange is concerned, I wouldn’t trust them with a lunch order, much less my life, and any person thinking of leaking sensitive material had better come to that understanding and do it fast.
Tomorrow we will address the other options available to people in such positions. There are many with proven track records of success. So far, the only thing proven about Wikileaks is that you shouldn’t touch them with a ten-foot pole. And that is all the news fit to print on that subject.